company and more, including charter communication. >> charter is proud to be recognized as one of the best internet providers and we're just getting started. building 100,000 miles of new infrastructure to reach those who need it most. >> charter communication suorts c-span, along with the other television providers. giving you a front row seat to democracy. today marks one year since an assassination attempt on dawn dawn in butler, pennsylvania. next a house oversight and accountability committee hearing with then-elected service director, kimberley cheatle. she referred to the attempt as the most significant operational failure of the secret service in decades. while testifying before house law makers who were calling for her resignation. she did resign shortly after this hearing. this runs just over 4.5 hours.

>> i want to welcome everyone here today and i know we wanted to welcome speaker johnson, who's also in attendance today. without objection, the chair may declare a recess at any time. i now recognize myself for the purpose of making an opening statement.

but first, representative of florida and representative miller of ohio are waved on to the committee for the purpose of questioning the witness at today's hearing. without objection, to order. >> good morning. today's hearing is for the american people seeking answers of thutempted assassination of president trump. a little over a week ago, americans watched in horror as a shooter attempted to assassinate president dawn dawn at a campaign rally in butler, pa. the gunman nearly succeeded. the bullet that struck's head was nearly an inch from taking his life. president trump survived but one tragically did not. 2 others seriously injured. it was a horrifying moment in american history. it was only exceeded by the bravery of the law enforcement agent whose threw themselves in

harm's way when shots were fired. and unwavering in the refusal to panic and the bravery of a bloody president trump refusing to run. prrsz while we give overwhelming thanks to the individual secret service agents who did their jobs under immense pressure, this tragedy was preventible. the secret service's protected mission is to protect u.s. existing world leaders and safeguard u.s. elections through protection of candidates and nominees. the secret service has a zero hch fail mission but it failed on july 13th and in the days leading up to the rally. the secret service has thousands of employees. and they significant budget. but it has now become the face of incompetence. the committee has a long track record of providing oversight of the secret service. our predecessors, both chasen chafe tsz and elijah kumens,

work together to issue warnings and recommendations to address obvious short comings in the agency's makeup. unfortunately, those warnings have gone unheeded. a former president and current candidate for president was shot in the head by a sniper within 500 feet of the podium. this is unacceptable. and we're concerned the secret service looks the proper management to keep protectees safe from bad actors. protectee safe from bad actors. americans demand answers. but they have not been getting them from the secret service. we're instead learning about new facts about the events surrounding the attempted assassination every day from whistle-blowers and leakers. americans demand accountability. but no one is yet to be fired for this historic failure.

today's witness, secret service service director, kimberley cheatle is here. in complete defiance, she's not tendered resignation and therefore will answer questions from members of the committee seeking to clarity of how these events were allowed to transfire. we will ask these questions about the secret service and the department of homeland security have been unwilling to provide answers to the american people. dhs has sought to push the hearing to a different time. secret service has suggest the hearing occur without media present. and both agencies have provided only shallow explanations to congress about what happened on july 13th. indeed, dhs and secret service's look of communication with the oversight committee required me

to issue a subpoena compelling director cheatle to attend and still dhs requested more time to prepare. it shouldn't take this much time or preparation for director cheatle to tell the truth and be transparent with the american people. i'm thankful to the ranking member, mr. ravingen for insisting director appear today. god knows the ranking member and i disagree on many things but that does not malter today. the secret service proeektes safety is not based on their affiliation and under director cheatle's leadership, we question whether anyone is safe, not president biden, the first lady, not the white house and certainly not the presidential candidate. the july 13th assassination attempt is one of the darkest days in american political history. it represents the ugliest parts of what american politics have become. hatred of each other and a

dangerous turn to extremism. before we were republicans or democrats, we are americans. if we place our political affiliations above our duty and love of country, we cannot maintain a country. we must insure our republic is strong and our republic cannot be strong when our leadership, our elections, our institutions and our candidates are threatened by extremism and violence. today director cheatle will answer questions about why she deserves to play a critical role in preserving the country's safety and at the very least, what led to the catastrophic, deadly vents on july 13th in butler, pennsylvania. again, i do not believe she deserves to maintain her position as head of the secret service but the american people will make their own decisions, based on her answers today. i urge her to be trarnz parent and forthcoming in testimony today. americans deserve no less.

we have a duty to find out how this happened and to insure it never happens again. i now yield to ranking member raskin for his opening statement. >> thank you kindly, chairman comer. elijah cummins taught us a way to find common ground is to look for the higher ground and last week we came together reach for that higher ground. we made a joint statement, condemning the mass shooting and assassination attempt against former president trump as a grave assault on our democracy as we wrote we're united in condemning all political violence. i join the good chairman in expressing condolences to family of cory and send healing wishes to the wounded victims also of this atrocious act of violence. some are calling it a some are calling it a miracle that former president trump

escaped this ar-15 attack. unlike so many thousands of our fellow citizens who have been killed or seriously wounded in other ar-15 shootings. whether this miracle is of divine providence for cash or on adventitious nature will be up to each of us to ponder, but our job in congress is not simply to marvel at miracles or count on good luck, but to act as public policy legislators to do whatever we can to prevent future political violence, attempted assassinations, and mass shootings. the chairman and i are thus determined to get to the bottom of this stunning security failures that enable this 20-year-old lone gunmen who borrowed his father's ar-15 to perpetrate a mass shooting an assassination attempt at an event protected by the secret service as well as state and local police. we will ask hard questions of director cheadle today to understand shocking security

failures and prevent anything like this from happening again. but we can't let ourselves off the hook. what happened was a double failure, the failure by the secret service to protect former president trump and the failure of congress to properly protect our people from printable -- criminal gun violence. we must ask hard questions whether our laws make it too easy for potential assassins to obtain weapons, assault weapons and ar-15 in particular that is -- the thousands of people who have fallen victims to mass shootings. last year we had six 155 mass shootings in america. defined as four or more people shot or killed in a single event. not including the shooter. 712 people died and 2700 people were wounded in these attacks in 2020 the.

they happened at elementary schools, middle schools, churches, synagogues, movie theaters, nightclubs, grocery stores, concerts and street corners. here are the worst mass shootings in the last 11 or 12 years. the list is a grim reminder of the horrific damage and death wrought by assault weapons and the ar-15 in particular that have taken the lives of our children, parents, colleagues and neighbors. 's a very partial list. mass shootings have become so frequent that we don't even hear about them anymore. since the mass shooting in butler the roof already been at least ten additional mass shootings in america. two of which took place the same day that former president trump was targeted. one of the mass shootings on that violent saturday, july 13, happened at 11:00 p.m. at a nightclub in birmingham,

alabama where four people were shot dead and 10 others wounded. this means amazingly, the butler attack wasn't even the deadliest mass shooting to happen in america on that day. a weapon that can be used to commit a mass shooting at events under the full protection of the secret service together with dozens of state and local police is obviously an intolerable threat to the rest of us who do not receive such protection, and obviously does not belong in our communities. it's time to pass universal background checks and build on this administration's work to ensure that we permanently close the loopholes in the brady law for gun show purchases, online purchases, and private sales to prevent those weapons from getting into the hands of people we know to be a threat to others. what happened in butler shows why even closing these loopholes, however, when i keep -- will not keep assault weapons out of the hands of potential assassins and mass murderers. under federal law and the vast majority states even young people not old enough to buy a

beer legally, can legally purchase and own the ar-15 and carry it in public. the shooter in butler used his father's ar-15. we have to find the courage and resolve to pass a ban on ar-15 and other assault weapons, a ban with broad support even the "new york post" loudly endorsed such a ban in 2019. we have passed an assault weapons ban before. republicans and democrats together passed it in 1994, and in 2004 we as allowed the ban to expire. we know this weapons ban work. one study found in the decade that followed the laps of the ban, mass shootings went back up 180 3% in deaths from mass shootings went up 230 9%. as we change the secret service and act to ban weapons of war, we will still fall short of our duty if we fail to denounce every instance of literately motivated violence in whatever

form -- politically motivated violence in whatever arm it takes. we have come together to denounce the assassination attempt like we did the attempts on the like -- the lives of gabby giffords, steve scully's, and the husband of nancy pelosi who was attacked in his home. the aftermath of the january 6 violence, democrats and republicans alike including senator mcconnell, chairman palmer and other colleagues, denounced this violent assault on our democracy that wounded approximately 140 officers from the u.s. capitol police and the metropolitan police department. i commend them to acting to denounce that attack just as democrats moved swiftly to denounce the attack on congressman scalise. police, political scientists tell us that authoritarian

attacks on democratic institutions begin with political parties refusing to disavow or openly embracing political violence. we have to reject that on a strong bipartisan basis as the chairman and i have done. even as we ensure the secret service is up to its vital task of protecting presidents and candidates, and work to ensure that the streets of america are re- from the violence of weapons of war. thank you, mr. chairman. chair comer: today we are joined by kimberly cheatle was sworn in to office on september 17, 2022, as the director of the united states secret service. prior to her appointment director cheatle was senior director of global security at pepsico. before her role at pepsi she served 27 years in the secret service. pursuant to committee rule 9g the witness will please stand and raise her right hand. do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth

so help you god? let the record show the witness answered in the affirmative. thank you. we certainly appreciate you being here today and look forward to your testimony. we normally limit testimony to , opening statements to five minutes, but take all the time you need. obviously, the rules that we will abide by, when you are finished with your statement, we will then turn to questions. each member will have five minutes. and just a note to the members, i'm going to strictly adhere to the five minutes. once five minutes is up i will hit the gavel. if the director is in the process of answering a question we will certainly let her finish her answers, and then we will move on. we're going to have about 100% attendance here today plus a few additional add-ons, so this will be a very lengthy hearing and we

went to make sure every member gets there five minutes uninterrupted to be able to add the important questions in this very bipartisan hearing today. i now recognize director cheatle for your opening statement. ms. cheatle: thank you. good morning, chairman comer, ranking member raskin, and distinguished members of the committee. my name is kimberly cheatle and i'm the director of the united states secret service. i appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today. the assassination attempt of former president donald trump on july 13 is the most significant operational failure of the secret service in decades, and i'm keeping him and his family in my thoughts. i would like to offer my sincerest condolences to the family of corey comperatore, a former fire chief and a hero who was killed in this senseless shooting. i would also like to acknowledge those who were injured in butler, david dutch and james copenhagen, and i wish them a speedy recovery. i would be remiss if i didn't

extend condolences on the passing of your colleague congresswoman sheila jackson , lee. ms. jackson lee was always engaged in the oversight of the secret service, and her passing is a great loss to this body. the secret service's solemn mission is to protect our nation's leaders. on july 13, we failed. as director of the united states secret service i take full responsibility for any security lapse of our agency. we are fully cooperating with ongoing investigations. we must learn what happened and i will move heaven and earth to ensure that an incident like july 13 does not happen again. let me state unequivocally. nothing i have said should be interpreted to place the blame for this failure on our federal, state or local law enforcement partners who supported the secret service in butler. we could not do job without them and we rely on the relationships built over years of working

together to secure events and conduct investigations. our agents, officers and support personnel understand that every day we are expected to sacrifice our lives to execute a no fail mission. as witnessed on july 13, our special agents shielded former president trump with their own bodies on the stage while shots were being fired. selflessly willing to make the ultimate sacrifice without hesitation. i'm proud beyond words of the actions taken by the former president's detail, the counter sniper team that neutralized the gunman, and the tactical team who was prepared to act. i will be transparent as possible when i speak with you. understanding though at times that i may be limited in providing a thorough response in this open setting due to associated risks with sharing highly sensitive protective methodologies. i do not want to inadvertently provide you with inaccurate information. since january 1, 2024, the secret service has successfully

secured over 7500 sites. every protective advance comes with its own set of challenges and requires the customize -- a customized mitigation strategy including specific assets. security plans are multilayered, providing 360 degrees of protection. these layers include personnel, technical, and tactical assets which are a force multiplier for our protective posture. during every advance we attempt to strike a balance between enabling the protectees to be visible and our requirements to be secure. i know this because i have spent 29 years in this agency. i came up through the ranks. i have secured events for every president since president clinton, supervised on vice president cheney's detail, led the training center oversaw all , of investigations and protected visits in the state of georgia, supervised on vice visited biden's detail, and

agencies entire protective mission during the trump administration. the comprehensive advanced process involves collaborative planning between our secret service, the protectee staff, local law enforcement partners, and the level of security provided for the former president increased well before the campaign and has been steadily increasing as threats evolve. the security plan included a full assessment of the butler farm showgrounds to identify security vulnerabilities and craft a security plan for the protectee, attendees, and the public. immediately following the assassination attempt i directed the activation of my crisis center. i assembled my executive team to begin searching more protective resources to the former incident and to ensure the wellness of our people post incident all while security and -- securing the active crime scene. i immediately ordered a reevaluation of the republican national convention security plan and to increase the security posture in the national

capital region for all permanent protectees and sites. at the same time i initiated a mission assurance investigation within our agency. i have instructed my team that all necessary resources will be dedicated to investigating these matters. we will not rest until we have explored every option and we will leave no stone unturned. but i want to be clear, i am not waiting for these investigations to be completed prior to making changes. over the past few weeks we successfully led the planning and execution of the 75th nato summit and republican national convention. over the next few months we will implement security plans for the democratic national convention, the united nations general assembly and we have already begun coordinating the 2025 inauguration. it is now more important than ever for the men and women of the secret service remained resilient and to focus on what is necessary to carry out our critical mission. our agency needs to be adequately resourced in order to serve our current mission requirements and anticipate future requirements.

the secret service currently protects 36 individuals on a daily basis as well as world leaders who visit the united states like israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu who arrived in washington, d.c. today. the coming years will bring an unprecedented heavy protection tempo. i have no doubt that the processes that i've implemented during my tenure as director in addition to my 30 years of experience in this agency have positioned the secret service to be stronger. our mission is not political. it is literally a matter of life and death, and the tragic events on july 13 remind us of that. i have full confidence in the men and women of the secret service. they are worthy of our support and executing our protective mission. i will now answer any questions that the committee may have. chair comer: thank you. we will now begin our five minutes of questions and i will begin. just for the record, the secret service has an annual budget of around $3.1 billion, and i believe around 8000 employees.

is that correct? ms. cheatle: yes, sir. chair comer: on the day of the -- obviously there were many security failures on the day of the attempted assassination a leading up to that day. let's start with the building the shooter used to shoot president trump from. at any point saturday did the secret service have an agent on top of that roof? ms. cheatle: i'm sure as you can imagine we are nine days out from the incident, and there is an ongoing investigation. so i want to make sure we are providing information -- chair comer: so you can't? why did the secret service, can you answer why the secret service did place a single agent on the roof? ms. cheatle: we are still looking into the advanced process and the decision speed -- being made. chair comer: wasn't the building within the perimeter that should be secured? do we agree with that? ms. cheatle: the building was outside of the perimeter on the date of the visit. but again that is one of the things that during the investigation we want to take a

look at and determine whether or not other decisions should have been made. chair comer: one of the things that you said i believe in an interview, that there wasn't an agent on the roof because it was a sloped roof. is that normal, and did you fear that immediately creates an opportunity for future would-be assassins to look for a slanted roof? i mean, this is a huge question that every american has. why wasn't a secret service agent on the roof? there have been reports that agents were supposed to be on the roof but it was hot that day and they didn't want to be on the roof. can you answer those questions? ms. cheatle: i appreciate you asking that question, chairman. i should have been more clear in my answer when i spoke about where we place personnel in that interview. what i can you is that the was a -- there was a plan in place to provide overwatch, and we are still looking into responsibilities and who is going to provide overwatch. but the secret service in general, not speaking specifically to this incident,

when we're providing overwatch whether that be through counter snipers or other technology prefer to have sterile rooftops. chair comer: did the secret service use any drones for surveillance that day? ms. cheatle: so again i'm not going to get into specifics of that day in itself but there are times during a security plan that the secret service has -- does deploy an asset like a drone. chair comer: there were reports that the shooter used a drone just a few hours before the rally start time. is that accurate? ms. cheatle: i have heard the same reports. and again i'm waiting for the final report. chair comer: do you know, if you can't answer the question, that's your answer. but can you answer this? do you know, i'm not asking yes or no but do you know if the shooter used a drone before the shooting? ms. cheatle: that information has been passed to us from the fbi. chair comer: how many secret service agents were assigned to president trump on the day of the rally?

ms. cheatle: i'm not going to get into the specifics of the numbers of personnel that we had there. but we feel that there was a sufficient number of agents assigned. chair comer: there are reports that several agents assigned to the rally on july 13 were temporary agents, not normally assigned to president trump it is accurate? ms. cheatle: what i can tell you is that the agents that were assigned to former president trump are secret service agents that provide close protection to him, and that was what was actual on that day. chair comer: how many temporary agents were there that day? ms. cheatle: quite frequently during campaign events the secret service utilizes agents from hsi, or the department of homeland security -- chair comer: you can't answer how many? have investigators reconstructed the shooter's precise movements over the past days, weeks and months? ms. cheatle: so again -- chair comer: we need to have confidence that if the fbi is

leading this investigation, that they are leading a credible investigation because there's some of us sitting up here today but don't have a lot of confidence in the fbi. so i will repeat the question. have the investigators reconstructed the shooters precise moment over the past days, weeks and months? ms. cheatle: i understand your question chairman. i share your concerns about wanting to make sure that we have factual information. the fbi is conducting a criminal investigation. the secret service is conducting an internal investigation. there are a number of oig investigations and there is the external investigation -- chair comer: last question from me. before july 13, had the trump detail requested additional resources? chair comer: ms. cheatle: what i can tell you is for the events on july 13, the details that were, the assets that were requested for that day were given. chair comer: my time has expired. the chair recognizes ranking member raskin. rep. raskin: thank you.

it has been reported that before former president trump got up on age around 6:00 p.m. on saturday, july 13 that the local police had identified and even photographed a man who was acting suspiciously. this man turned out to be the gunman, and had been flagged as a potential threat. is that accurate? ms. cheatle: what i can say is that the individual was identified as suspicious. rep. raskin: so he was known to be suspicious before former president trump took the stage. ms. cheatle: that is information i have received. rep. raskin: why was he allowed to take the stage with a suspicious person having been identified in the crowd? ms. cheatle: i appreciate the question and i would like to make two points. if the detail had been passed information that there was a threat, the detail would never have brought the former president out onto stage. that is what we do and that is who we are. we are charged with protecting all of our protectees.

rep. raskin: you distinguish between someone who is suspicious and someone who is threatening? ms. cheatle: we do. there are a number of times at protective events where suspicious people are identified, and those individuals have to be investigated and determined what is it that identifies that person as suspicious. rep. raskin: did you deny a request for additional resources that have been made by the trump campaign? ms. cheatle: there were no assets denied for that event in butler on the 13th. rep. raskin: i see. so you're saying there were requests made for additional assistance for other specific events rather than the campaign as a whole, is that right? ms. cheatle: i'm sorry, i'm not understanding -- rep. raskin: you seem to say there were not additional resources requested for that event, and forgive me for being unfamiliar with this. is it requested events by event, or is it requested just in general for the campaign? ms. cheatle: so if i can explain the advanced process.

when an event or venue is identified by, in this case, campaign staff, then the campaign staff works together with secret service agents who duct in advance. generally that is a five day time period. discussions are had about what the perimeter is going to look like and what the size of the venue is. and then from there there's a request made to mitigate potential risks and threat. and i'm saying that on that day the requests that were pushed forward were granted. rep. raskin: so the secret service did not know that the gunman actually had a weapon before president trump was allowed to get up on stage? ms. cheatle: the best of our knowledge and the facts we have at this point, that is correct. rep. raskin: to this question? which i think is on the minds of most americans thinking about this. how can a 20-year-old with with his father's ar-15 assault weapon climb on to a roof with a direct 150-yard line of sight,

to the speaker's podium, without the secret service or local police stopping him? ms. cheatle: again i will say we , are nine days out from this event, and i would like to know those answers as well, which is why we are going through these investigations to be able to determine that fully. rep. raskin: ok. it's been reported that the shooter was not carrying a driver's license or any form of identification. they had no idea who he was, but then he was quickly identified, i think within 30 minutes, by using the serial number on the ar-15. under a tracing system that is now controversial. some people say we should get rid of it, some people want to keep it. but is that right that the serial number was the key information which led to the identification of the shooter? ms. cheatle: that is my understanding, sir, yes. rep. raskin: ok.

if an american citizen were just to stop you and say, director cheatle, we support your work to the tune of billions of dollars and thousands and thousands of employees, what went wrong? what would you say? ms. cheatle: knowing we are nine days out i would say as i have said from the outset. i accept responsibility for this tragedy. we are going to look into how this happened and we are going to take corrective action to ensure it never happens again. rep. raskin: i appreciate that, and i hope you will act with vigor and focus and intensity in -- and it seems you understand the gravity and solemnity of this, to the american people. millions and millions of americans don't feel safe with all the ar-15 out there. we thought at least the president or former president of the united states would be safe but now that's not even clear. i yield back. chair comer: we recognize mr. jordan.

rep. jordan: were you guessing relying? the day after president trump is shot, secret service spokesman anthony said an associate of the former president's security team requested additional resources that the department of homeland security and secret service rebuffed is absolutely false. the next day secretary may forecast said that is unequivocally false assertion. we've not received any request for additional security measures that were rebuffed. five days later the "washington post" said this. top officials repeatedly rejected requests from donald trump's security detail for more personnel. the new york times said this the next day. he acknowledged that the secret service had turned down some requests for additional federal security assets for mr. trump's detail. so which is it? both statements can't be true. where you guessing relying when you said you didn't turn down requests from president trump's detail? ms. cheatle: neither, sir.

i appreciate the question. rep. jordan: those statements don't jive. ms. cheatle: what i can tell you is for the events in butler there were no request that were denied. as far as requests -- rep. jordan: maybe they got tired of asking. maybe you turned them down so much they said it is not worth asking. how many times did you turn them down ahead of that? ms. cheatle: it is important to distinguish between what some may view as a denial of an asset or work last -- rep. jordan: is into your spokesperson? he said he acknowledged there was a denial of request. ms. cheatle: a denial is not equal to a vulnerability. there are a number of ways threats and risks can be mitigated with a number of different assets, whether that is through personnel whether , that be through technology or other resources. rep. jordan: tell the committee

which it was. they asked for additional help in some form or another. you told them no. how many times did you tell them know, and what did you tell them no to? ms. cheatle: i can't speak to specific incidents but in general terms, the secret service is judicious with their resources based on -- >> how many times? requests is plural so more than once they asked for help and you turned them down. what did they ask for and how many times did you turn them down? ms. cheatle: without having all of the details in front of me, i can tell you there were times -- >> you didn't get briefed on that before you came to this hearing knowing you would get aspect question -- asked that question? ms. cheatle: in generic terms when details make a request, there are times that there are alternate ways to cover off on

that printer risk. >> he said they were denied certain requests. this is your spokesperson, the secret service talking. what a change from absolutely false, too by the way there were sometimes we didn't give them what they wanted? that's a huge change in five days. the fact you can't answer how many times you did that, that's pretty frustrating not just for me but for the country. ms. cheatle: i hear your frustration. rep. jordan: let me ask you this. were any of those request denied for president trump's detail afternoon about the iranian threat? ms. cheatle: what i can tell you again i don't know the specifics is that there are times when we alert request, it doesn't necessarily have to be with a secret service assets or resources. we can fill the request with locally available assets. >> spoke to anyone at the white house since july 13? >> yes, i have. who did you talk to? ms. cheatle: i briefed the

president and the first lady. >> did you talk to anyone in white house communications? the counter sniper who took a shot that took out the bad guy? x yes i have. >> can you tell us about the conversation? >> i will not want to reveal conversations i've had with my employees. >> that's exactly the information the american people want to know. the american people pay your salary. >> i understand that this is an ongoing investigation. >> who's doing the investigation at the secret service? i knew the inspector general but is there an internal investigation? ms. cheatle: we are conducting an internal investigation. >> rep. jordan: you know it looks like? looks like you will not answer basic questions, and i -- you cut corners when it comes to protecting a well-known individual, a former president. >> i'm here because i want to answer questions -- >> you haven't answered one question from the chairman, the ranking member or me.

we have a lot of other people asking. we will see if that improves but i don't think you have answered any questions. chair comer: the chair recognizes mr. norton from washington, d.c.. rep. norton thank you, mr. chairman. in the summer of 1963 as a law student i traveled to the south to work in the civil rights movement. when i arrived in jackson, mississippi, i was met by civil rights activists, who showed me around town and tried to convince me to work in jackson that summer. i recall talking with him and his wife about the rural atmosphere in jackson. later that day he took me to the bus station for my trip to my assignment. that night he was assassinated outside his home. his name was medgar evers. i condemn the political violence. it is a threat to democracy. i wanted to discuss one of the roots of political violence, guns. for years, republicans including

a member of this committee have for years, republicans including a member of this committee have introduced legislation and amendments to repeal or block the district of columbia gun violence protection laws, including bans on assault weapons and large capacity magazines. the shooter at the trump rally used the mass's gun -- the mass shooter's gun of choice, including ar-15 style rifle, and presumably a large capacity magazine which is defined in d.c. as a magazine that can hold more than 10 bullets. under current d.c. law, d.c. doesn't recognize concealed carry permits issued by the jurisdiction. but it does issue concealed carry permits to both residents and nonresidents.

however, d.c. imposes a number a number of requirements on concealed carry applicants, including suitability, such as not having exhibited a propensity for violence or instability. moreover, d.c. residents, restricts whether guns can be carried such as a political demonstration near the white house and naval observatory or near people under secret service protection provided the permit holder has been given notice. this week, the house is expected to consider the fiscal year 2025 financial services and general government appropriations bill. this republican drafted bill would allow an individual with a permit to carry a concealed handgun issued by a state or

territory to carry a concealed handgun in d.c., regardless of that jurisdiction's permit requirements. a republican has filed an amendment to that provision to allow such an individual to carry a magazine of any size with that handgun. in short, the pending bill an amendment would allow any person with a carry permit issued by another jurisdiction to carry a concealed handgun with a magazine of any size in any location in the district of columbia. the secret service is responsible for protecting a large number of people and facilities in d.c. director cheatle, would secret service protectees in d.c. be safer or less safe if people who have exhibited a propensity for

violence or instability could carry a concealed handgun in d.c.? ms. cheatle: i think being a secret service agent or law enforcement officer in any state is difficult. they are required to make decisions and snap judgments in the blink of an eye. and i think that the officers and agents that work in the d.c. area do a great job of monitoring the public and reacting to threats as appropriate when they arise. rep. norton: would secret service protectees in d.c. be safer or less safe if people in d.c. could carry concealed handguns with large capacity magazines? ms. cheatle: i think we work in parameters when we travel around

north america, and rules on open carry and concealed carry are different from state to state. and that is part of what the secret service takes into account when we develop a security plan. obviously anyone that comes into one of our protected sites we would establish magnetometer support, metal detectors that personal would have to process through eliminating that potential. rep. norton: would secret service protectees in d.c. be safer or less safe if more people could carry handguns in d.c.? ms. cheatle: i think again as i stated we want to make sure that we provide a state -- a safe environment for all our protective and whatever measures we would need to put in place for a secure site we would do so. rep. norton: i yield back. chair comer: the chair recognizes the chairman of house intelligence committee, mr. turner from ohio. rep. turner: director cheatle, your opening statement indicates the secret service constructed a security plan site in

pennsylvania. i'm assuming that plan would also include the security footprint for the site but also would be based upon a threat assessment for the risk threats associated with donald trump and the crowd in attendance, would -- would it not include a threat assessment? ms. cheatle: yes, it would. rep. turner: so that threat assessment as we know basically what it started with, john was threat against donald trump because he is a presidential candidate. it would have gone through president and he gets security covered just as others do. thing -- and then you have the heightened political environment. even for those it's clear the security footprint that the threat assessment was insufficient which permitted a 20-year-old to actually inter-a -- enter with a weapon and shoot donald trump. i want to ask you about two other aspects of the threat assessment. it is known and public that iran is a threat risk for donald trump. they are a threat risk for john bolton, former secretary of state pompeo and donald trump

because they've indicated they wanted to assassinate them as result of retaliation for the killing of general soleimani. that is a generalized threat from iran, but most recently, a specific threat to donald trump himself. now i want to enter into the record by you see a department of justice public affairs release, a cnn article, an article from fox news and an article from cbs all of which acknowledge -- chair comer: without objection. rep. turner: that there are specific threats most recently that have been acknowledged. director cheatle, have you read the intelligence of the generalized threat to donald trump by iran as result of their desire to retaliate for the killing of general soleimani's? ms. cheatle: i have. rep. turner: have you read or been briefed about the intelligence of the specific recent threat to donald trump from iran?

ms. cheatle: yes, i have. rep. turner: director ray, when we were getting our briefing, said he thought the threat assessment should have included this threat from iran. is it your testimony today that the threat assessment since you read this intelligence was sufficient to protect him from this threat from iran? ms. cheatle: my testimony today is that the information that we had at the time was no that -- was known. rep. turner: was it sufficient for the iranian threat that you said you have read the intelligence briefing for? ms. cheatle: that information was passed -- rep. turner: i'm not asking the bureaucratic issue of who it got passed around two. was it sufficient for the specific and generalize threat to donald trump life from iran? ms. cheatle: yes, i do believe it was. rep. turner: director cheatle, is an iranian assassin more capable than a 20-year-old? ms. cheatle: i think we've

acknowledged that there was gaps and a failure that day. rep. turner: when i raised this issue with director ray, he was shocked the threat assessment of iran did not seem to be as -- he and i discussed baked into your security footprint. he went on to say that the generalized threat that he has told the whole country that we are under from a terrorist, a potential terrorist threat that he is said we are under the highest threat level since 9/11, that the lights are flashing red. he has specifically indicated that people have crossed the southern border as a result of the biden administration's policy and that there are terrorists individuals who are affiliated with terrorist groups and organizations. that would be a heightened threat environment, director cheatle, would it not? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. turner: in his public statements he has said he is making these statements because he wants people to take them into consideration in threat

assessments. that would be a threat not just to donald trump but it would also be a threat to the crowd there, wouldn't it? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. turner: are isis terrorists and al-qaeda terrorists international groups and terrorists more capable than a 20-year-old in pulling off a mass shooting or an of donald trump? -- shooting or assassination of donald trump? ms. cheatle: again there was clearly a breakdown and a fairly that they. rep. turner: have you read the intelligence of the terrorists that are currently in the united states that director wray speaks and those individuals that here affiliate with terrorist groups and organizations that are in ai and organizations that are in an the process as director wray said of representing a significant threat of a terrorist attack occurring in the united states? ms. cheatle: i have read reports that apply specifically to the secret service mission. rep. turner: director cheatle, because donald trump is life and thank god he is, you look incompetent. if donald trump had been killed

you would've looked culpable. there's no aspect of this that indicates that there is been any protection of donald trump. the threat was identified before he took stage, the stage, and the shooter was only killed after donald trump himself was killed. not only should he resign, president biden needs to fire you. because his life, donald trump's life and all the other people which you protect are at risk because you have no concept of the aspect that the security footprint needs to be correlated to the threat. i yield back. chair comer: the chair now recognizes mr. lynch from massachusetts. rep. lynch: thank you, mr. chairman. director cheatle, there were multiple security failures at the former president's rally in the butler, pennsylvania. first of all, there was a failure to isolate the podium from exposure to direct fire. do we know who made that decision to allow that rooftop to remain as an unprotected

area? do we know who came up with that security plan that omitted that? ms. cheatle: sir, i don't have a specific person to identify -- rep. lynch: that's what i'm looking for, so let's move on. there's also a breakdown in security and failure to confront the shooter over an hour before the former president began his remarks when the shooter was identified as a person of interest. what particularly allowed agents or law enforcement to identify him as a person of interest? ms. cheatle: sir, i appreciate the question and again i will say that we are nine days out and there are a multitude of interviews that are still taking place. rep. lynch: ok, so did he have a rangefinder? there were some reports that the individual had a rangefinder. that would certainly raise my suspicion. did he have a rangefinder? ms. cheatle: yes he did, but may

i explain that out of number of our sites especially when you're at outdoor venues, a rangefinder is not a prohibited item. it is sometimes an item that is brought in by individuals that -- rep. lynch: anybody confront him on that? anybody asking questions, what are you doing with your rangefinder? anybody confront him on his presence where he was in proximity to the president? ms. cheatle: again, to my knowledge, i believe that was the process being taken place. rep. lynch: did they confronted, did they go up to him, talk to him? ms. cheatle: i do not have those details. rep. lynch: those are important details. there was also a future communicate between law enforcement to act quickly upon information divided by either -- provided by either local law enforcement or rally attendees that the suspect was position on -- positioned on the roof. there were minutes of delay before any meaningful act was -- meaningful action was taken.

even though he was several hundred feet from the podium. this was obviously minutes before the shooting. let me ask you, there was considerable delay in removing the president from the podium after the shooting began. he was shot in the air, it was over one minute before he was removed from the stage. meanwhile, this shooter had multiple clips, several clips. he got off eight shots and had the capacity and the ability if he was not neutralized to basically mow down that whole secret service detachment as well as the president. what, from your own investigation, caused that delay under the circumstances? ms. cheatle: what i can tell you is that when the agents identified that the shooting was taking place, in under three

seconds they threw themselves on -- rep. lynch: i understand that, there was heroism there. no question about it. but protocol would indicate, and these are, you know, these are the opinions of various former secret service agents, people who have done this work in the past, that over a minute of exposure on that podium with a shooter with a high-capacity weapon who had already wounded the president and could have got off, we don't know how many more rounds, and yet the president remained exposed, even though he was joined in the exposure by the secret service in their heroic acts. i don't know if there's a good explanation for that. ms. cheatle: our personnel created a body bumper -- bunker

on top of the president, shielding him. rep. lynch: i get that. this was an ar-15 style weapon. that would've made pretty quick work if he was determined, and able to do so. this is not the first investigation we have had on the secret service during my time here on this committee. in the last when we had our previous investigation determined that the secret service was experienced a -- experiencing a staffing crisis that poses perhaps the greatest threat to the agency. and that's a quote. is that staffing crisis still in place? is it still something you deal with on a daily basis? ms. cheatle: as of today, the secret service has just over 8000 employees. we continue to hire, knowing that we need to ensure that we keep pace with -- rep. lynch: what would be the full complement -- chair comer: time has expired but please answer the question. rep. lynch: what would be the full complement you are looking for? how many would be a full complement for the service? ms. cheatle: we are still

striving toward a number of 95 hundred employees approximately in order to be able to meet future and emerging needs. rep. lynch: thank you for your courtesy. chair comer: the chair recognizes dr. fox from north carolina. rep. foxx: thank you, mr. chairman. director cheatle, what grade would you give the secret service's performance in butler, pennsylvania, on july 13? ms. cheatle: as i stated, ma'am, this was clearly a failure. i would grade the agents and officers who selflessly threw themselves in front of president and neutralized the threat an a. i think that we need to examine the events that led up to and prior to that day. rep. foxx: you stated in 2021 that the secret service has a zero fail mission. it's clear that the events of july 13 show a cascade of failures that nearly caused

the former president his life and injured david dutch and james copenhagen. when an agency fails spectacularly in its mission, those responsible must be held accountable and the problems must be fixed so they cannot happen again. why should the american people or the officials you are responsible for protecting have confidence in your ability to lead the secret service after such a spectacular failure? ms. cheatle: i appreciate the question and i'm committed to finding answers. so that we can make the agencies stronger after this. rep. foxx: you said july 15 that the buck stops with me. how are you taking accountability for the secret service's failures during the july 13 assassination and attempt on president trump? ms. cheatle: i have taken accountability and i will continue to take accountability. i am responsible for leading the agency and i am responsible for finding answers to have this event occurred and making sure it does not happen again.

rep. foxx: i would like to explore how you got the job as director of the united states secret service. is it typical for the director of the secret service to be recommended for the role at the behest of a president's family and senior staff, perhaps at the request of joe biden or anthony bernal? ms. cheatle: i got the job as the director of the secret service because i spent 27 years in any agency with a mission that i absolutely love. i started my career in detroit, i worked my way up through investigations and protection. rep. foxx: was there competition for the position? ms. cheatle: you would have to ask those involved in the interview process. rep. foxx: but you think you are the best person in the country to head the secret service? ms. cheatle: i think i am the best person to lead the secret service at this time. rep. foxx: the secret service receives billions in funding each year as has been explained

by my colleagues here. in fact, you have had an increase in real terms of 55%, as you are no doubt aware, staffing levels for those assigned to protect the former presidents other senior officials has decreased by about 350 between 2014 and today. clearly a lack of financial resources is not to blame for the staffing shortage. in 20, the secret service saw nearly half the workforce leave in one year. during the same year, it was ranked last among law enforcement agencies in the best places to work in the federal government. can you explain why your agency was so poorly rated and why so many staff left in one year? ms. cheatle: with all due respect, i dispute the statistic of half the employees leaving in 2022.

i think that is inaccurate data reported out there. what i can tell you is as i have returned as director of the agency we have had an increase in hiring and staffing and in resources, and we are committed to continue to hire so that we can be staffed appropriately to meet the dynamic mission we have. rep. foxx: you may want to dispute it, but it is out there. given the high profile failures and rotten culture at the secret service during your nearly two year tenure, why should the american people have any confidence in your ability to lead the secret service perform -- to perform its zero fail mission to protect their senior leaders? ms. cheatle: the secret service has an incredible culture. our men and women place service over self. they come in every day willing to risk their lives for our projected mission investigations

that for to people who would do harm to children, child exploiters. we have an incredible mission and our culture is we will get the job done no matter what. rep. foxx: those on the front lines certainly have a great culture, and they were willing to risk their lives for president trump. i'm not sure the leadership at the agency has the right kind of culture. i yield back. chair comer: the chair recognizes mr. conley from virginia. rep. connolly: thank you, mr. chairman. i hope the american people do appreciate the incredible daily risks the secret service agents take on our behalf. you mentioned there are 36 regular clients you have that you protect constantly. but i was participating in the nato summit two weeks ago. we had 32 heads of government and heads of state, plus visiting heads of state and heads of government, presumably

provided protection for all of them. ms. cheatle: that is correct. rep. connolly: just saying. help us understand however, is i will stipulate there is an ongoing investigation that you don't want to go into much detail on that until you have been able to ascertain all the facts and analyze what they mean. you can understand the anxiety we and the american public have about how could this happen? and how can we ensure it can't recur? there are some things my friends on one particular side of the aisle don't want to talk about. like ar-15's and access to them by a 20-year-old, or anybody for that matter. presumably, director cheatle, the ubiquity of weapons, because -- and guns in america, especially assault weapons or semi automatic weapons, that has

helped your job and the mission of your agencies. it has made it less complicated, isn't that true? ms. cheatle: i'm sorry, i'm not understanding your question. rep. connolly: real simple, more guns, especially dangerous ones, have made your job protecting people easier is that. not right -- is that not right? ms. cheatle: i think from -- rep. connolly: this is simple english. morgan's -- more guns, do they make your job more complicated or less complicated in protecting these 36 clients and visiting heads of state and government that come to washington? ms. cheatle: i think the secret service needs to take into -- rep. connolly: i didn't ask that. i asked a simple question, which deserves a simple answer. the ubiquity of guns, dangerous weapons in america like ar-15's, has that made your job, that is to say the mission of the secret service, easier or more difficult? ms. cheatle: i think the threat environment for protecting our

secret service protect these is always difficult and that is dynamic and it is always evolving. rep. connolly: we stipulate it is always difficult. again -- this is a simple one. does the ubiquity of guns make your job easier or more difficult today? ms. cheatle: i understand the second rights of individuals -- rep. connolly: i didn't ask that question. i'm asking a simple analysis, director cheatle. i can tell you, you are not making my job easier in terms of assessing your qualifications to continue on as director. please answer the question. you have ahead of the secret service. you are speaking on behalf of of a thousand members who put their lives on the line. we had a failure by your own admission. do guns make your job easier or harder? ms. cheatle: i think the job of the secret service is difficult on every day, so we need to make

sure we are mitigating all threats whether that be -- rep. connolly: that isn't my question. that is not my question. and now i think you are evading the answer. which is not a hard one. ms. cheatle: i'm sorry you feel that way, sir. rep. connolly: how else could i feel, director cheatle, when you are clearly avoiding a direct answer to a very simple declarative question? we almost lost a presidential candidate the other day. a 20-year-old have access to his father's ar-15 and got on top of a roof within 500 yards or feet of the podium. and i'm asking you, did the availability of that ar-15, replicated all across america, make your job harder or easier, and you are not willing to answer that question? and you wonder why we might have a lack of confidence in your continued ability to direct this agency? ms. cheatle: i understand your question and that is --

rep. connolly: if you understand my question then why not answer it? ms. cheatle: it is the environment that the secret service works in everyday. rep. connolly: doesn't tell me anything. that is the environment we work in. i had an attack on my office a year ago. i know a little bit about violence too. he came to kill me. when he couldn't, he beat one of my staffers eight times with a baseball bat on the head. we live with the threat of violence. but a simple answer from the director of the secret service would be helpful. and i'm sorry you have chosen to evade it. i yield back. chair comer: the chair recognizes mr. grossman from wisconsin. rep. grothman: thank you. when this guy took the shots, he climbed a ladder to get on the roof, correct? ms. cheatle: i'm unable to answer details of how the individual accessed the roof at

this time. rep. grothman: do you know if he did use the latter, do you know when the letter was placed there? was the latter there two days before, the night before? do you have any information? ms. cheatle: i would like to be able to answer those questions. the fbi is still conducting an investigation. rep. grothman: how did the rifle get to the roof? ms. cheatle: again, i am unable to answer questions to provide -- rep. grothman: they cleaned the roof since the assassination attempt? ms. cheatle: have they cleaned the roof? rep. grothman: wright, anything done to the roof? is it just like it was 10 days ago? or not? has anything been done to the roof? ms. cheatle: i don't have an answer for that. rep. grothman: ok. were president trump's normal agents normally assigned to him, where they there that day? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. grothman: these were the

same agents that were always there? ms. cheatle: yes, sir. the people assigned to his detail were working that day. rep. grothman: there is stuff on the internet that says they were not there that day, but these are the same agents who are routinely there. ms. cheatle: yes, sir. rep. grothman: ok. do we know which agents fired this -- the shots that took down the potential assassin? ms. cheatle: yes, sir, i do. rep. grothman: can you give us those names, or the background of those agents? ms. cheatle: i would not offer their name up in the setting boat it was one of our technical officers, our counter snipers. rep. grothman: can we privately get those names to the committee? ms. cheatle: i am certain we can make names available privately. rep. grothman: ok. do we know where all of the shots landed? first of all, how many shots did the potential assassin, how many shots came out of the rifle?

ms. cheatle: i would hesitate to offer that information is the fbi is conducting an eight investigation. rep. grothman: have we got the bullets from all the shots? ms. cheatle: that would be the responsibility of the fbi to collect that evidence. rep. grothman: ok. do we have any correspondence from the shooter? has that been recovered from his phone? ms. cheatle: again, i would have to differ you to the fbi for details on that investigation. rep. grothman: ok. you spent some time trying to change the makeup of the secret service. you feel there were 2 -- too high of a percentage. does this affect at all who you are hiring for the secret service? ms. cheatle: i've spent my time as the director trying to increase the number of people we

hire in the secret service so that we have the best and brightest and that has been my concentration as director. rep. grothman: rep. grothman: you are hiring, not hiring men because of your desire to hit certain targets? ms. cheatle: i'm hiring the best qualified candidates that want to work for our great organization. rep. grothman: ok. next question. the shooter obtained a direct site of president trump from the position on the rooftop. i assume that should never happen. do you want to elaborate on how that happened or what you wish you had done differently or would do different the next time there is a trump rally? ms. cheatle: again, the facts of this particular event are still

unfolding. nine days there have been a number of reports out there so i don't want to provide information that would contradict something that was erroneously reported or is not factual. there was clearly a mistake and we will make sure this was not -- this never happens again. rep. grothman: can you elaborate why you want the secret service to be one third women? ms. cheatle: i have never stated that i want one third of the secret service to be women. rep. grothman: you had some target. i yield. chair comer: what was erroneously reported? you said something was erroneously ordered. what were you referring to? the question was in the context of the shooter using a ladder to get on the building. you won't tell us anything but you will tell us something that wasn't reported accurately. ms. cheatle: there have been a

number of reports out there that have been speculation and until we have the actual facts, i don't want to report anything that would contradict speculation that has been out there. chair comer: the chair recognizes mr. krishnamurthy from rep. krishnamoorthi: thank illinois. you for being with us this morning. and i get asked a lot is what can congress do to stop this from happening again? i would like to share a graphic recent study by a world renowned -- by a world renowned expert in combating political violence. it shows 74% of americans want congress to come together to denounce political violence and it is all across party lines. i think the chair for condemning political violence. i would like to ask my colleagues to join us in

introducing a resolution that could secure unanimous house passage in deploring and condemning political violence and we will be circulating the resolution shortly. as you know, the shooter began shooting at 6:11 p.m. eastern on july 13. nbc reported that at 5:51 p.m., 20 minutes before the shooting began, the state police informed secret service of their concerns. the rally was not pause at that time, correct? ms. cheatle: no. rep. krishnamoorthi: two minutes later, the secret service notified its snipers about the gunmen. the rally was not pause at that point either. correct? ms. cheatle: no. rep. krishnamoorthi: here are the rally-goer's. if you can play the video.

this was taken two minutes before the shooting started. if you can turn up the volume. >> he is on the roof. right here. flat on the roof. he is standing up now. he is on the roof. rep. krishnamoorthi: that doesn't look like suspicious behavior, that looks like reddening behavior to me and the rally was not paused at that time either -- threatening behavior to me and the rally was not paused at that time either? ms. cheatle: i can state the moment the shift surrounding the president were aware of an actual threat -- rep. krishnamoorthi: that is a threat. the guy is on the roof and everybody is yelling at him and directing the officer's attention to him. the rally was not paused at that point, correct? ms. cheatle: we are still coming through communications and when communications were passed. rep. krishnamoorthi: i can point you to this. two minutes before shots, yes or

no, was there ever a moment when the secret service considered pausing the rally? ms. cheatle: the secret service would have paused the rally had they known -- rep. krishnamoorthi: so the answer is no? correct? ms. cheatle: i can speak to you. in generalities. rep. krishnamoorthi: i don't want generalities. the answer is no, you didn't consider pausing the rally, correct? ms. cheatle: the people that are in charge of protecting the president on that day would never bring the former president out if there was a threat that had been identified. rep. krishnamoorthi: what they did because we identified three points in the 20 minutes before the shooting that the threat emerged. let me point you to something else. is the building the shooter was perched on, seen here. this building is called the agr building. i'm sure you're familiar with that. it is not more than 150 yards

from the stage were donald trump stood but they security perimeter was drawn such that the building was placed outside of it. according to the washington post, the ar-15 style rifle used in the shooting had a range of 400-6 hundred yards and the agr building was clearly within rifle range of the stage. correct? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. krishnamoorthi: nbc news reported in the days prior to the rally the secret service identified the building is a vulnerability the required special attention, correct? ms. cheatle: that is reporting from nbc? rep. krishnamoorthi: yes. ms. cheatle: i'm still looking into an active investigation. rep. krishnamoorthi: it has been nine days. you should know that. yet despite the fact that the agr building was in rifle range of the stage and was flagged as a vulnerability the building was put outside the secret service security perimeter. and i respectfully submit secret service must expand security

perimeters to account for the kinds of weapons that can be used outside the perimeter to endanger the protect these -- protectees inside the perimeter. let me turn your attention to some conspiracy theories that have been circulating and ask you to comment on them. you have not found evidence the incident was a staged shooting right?. ms. cheatle: correct. ms. cheatle: rep. krishnamoorthi: and you have not found evidence this was a conspiracy of high-ranking government officials and that this incident was not directed by a foreign state and entity. ms. cheatle: not at this time. rep. krishnamoorthi: thank you i yield back. i want to confirm there was one counter sniper who took one shot. correct? ms. cheatle: we had multiple counter sniper teams. >> only one took one shot?

ms. cheatle: correct. >> how many spent shell casings were found on the roof? ms. cheatle: i would have to defer to the fbi criminal director investigation. rex and the car was with with explosives? >> i would have to do for you to the fbi investigation? >> you're not curious, you don't communicate with them? cnn reported the secret service didn't sweep the building the shooter was using to shoot trump and other attendees, is that true or false? ms. cheatle: we are conducting a mission assurance investigation and will depend on the information we obtain from our investigations. ripple cloud -- rep. cloud: secret service knew there was a suspicion person anywhere from eight minutes before he walked on stage to 30 to 60 minutes. was trump or his team notified of the threat? ms. cheatle: i think there is a difference and distinction between suspicious and rhett.

-- and threats. we are looking at communications to know when the information about a suspicious person was passed to the secret service personnel. rep. cloud: was president trump or his team notified? ms. cheatle: we are going back and looking to make sure we have the exact information of when those notifications were made on -- and who the notifications were made to. rep. cloud: it is troubling that the number one question everyone is wondering is why was the roof left open? after nine days we should have maybe a little of that information. when you come to this committee hearing and you do not have anything to say about it, it is very troubling. did you review the security plan for this event? ms. cheatle: i personally do not review security plans for events that take place across the country. rep. cloud: any of them? ms. cheatle: we have a number of events --

rep. cloud: who is the top-level level official who reviews the security plans? ms. cheatle: a number of people review security plans -- rep. cloud: who is responsible for signing off on the security plan? ms. cheatle: it is a conjunction of personnel. there are people on the ground, supervisors on the hill and people that had orders. rep. cloud: so not one person who says this is good, we are going for it? ms. cheatle: much in the way that we build our security plans, where there are -- rep. cloud: no doubt different teams work different aspects but is there an individual who signs off on the plan? ms. cheatle: much like how we design our security plans, they are multilayered, there are -- rep. cloud: there is no accountability? ms. cheatle: there is accountability. rep. cloud: the fbi, fauci, it is time after time after time that these multiple layers of accountability that turn into plausible deniability. agency after agency has to be

fixed because you keep expecting , you are saying i'm responsible but you are accountable for it but there is nothing. what do you mean by that? you are saying you will keep your job, right? ms. cheatle: i assure you that if we determine through the course of our investigation that someone or people need to be held accountable, we will do so. rep. cloud: what level, if president biden god forbid had been shot and killed, would you think that was worthy of resignation? ms. cheatle: i would do the same thing i am doing here where i would want to make sure we are conducting an investigation, that there is continuity in the investigation, and that we can find the answer to what happened. rep. cloud: you don't think the assassination of someone under your detail is worthy of resignation? ms. cheatle: i think this event was tragic and deserves answers. rep. cloud: the thing you have said so far is you want to make sure this never happens again. but everyone in america knows it

is not the job description you are tasked with. that is to make sure it never happens, pup up. -- period. one of your goals in the strategic plan is to champion diversity, equity, and accessibility. you accomplished accessibility. what standards, do you keep the same standards for all applicants? does every secret service agent meet the same qualifications or do you have different standards for different people? ms. cheatle: everyone who moves through the application process has to meet that same standards to become a special agent. rep. cloud: ok. the trouble i think we are having with right now, you gave a lame excuse for sloped roof, that local law enforcement job was to cover up the building before backtracking on that, we were told president trump's team did not ask for security before you backtracked on that, you have not provided the audio recording that the committee,

the chairman requested that was due on thursday. you did not give us an advanced copy of your opening statement but yet there was reporting on it somewhere else, there seems to be more information from youtube videos then you are able to provide us and it begs the question to anyone, you are in charge of the investigation of your own failure. so how is anyone in america supposed to be able to trust the results of that investigation as being anything transparent and genuine? chair comer: that is the last question but please feel free to answer. ms. cheatle: have been a secret service agent for nearly 30 years. i have lead with integrity and i follow our core values of duty, justice, honor, loyalty, courage and i am doing that in this case and i assure this committee that i will provide answers when we have a full and complete report in addition to cooperating with all the other investigations that are ongoing. chair comer: the chair

recognizes mr. connor from california. >> i would like to thank the chair and ranking member for convening the hearing at a bipartisan basis. i join them in condemning the horrific assassination attempt on the former president. i am relieved for the sake of the country, that he wasn't seriously hurt and he survived and my thoughts are with him and his family during this traumatic event. i want to express condolences to cory and his family, and recognize his heroism in saving his daughter's life and to the victims of that awful event. director cheatle, you agree this is the most security lapse since president reagan was shot in 1981 of the secret service? ms. cheatle: yes i would. rep. khanna: do you know what

stuart knight did when he was in charge of the secret service? do you know what he did afterwards? ms. cheatle: he remained on duty. rep. khanna: he resigned. he resigned. stuart knight was not a democrat or republican appointee. i am not questioning your judgment. i just don't think this is partisan. if you have an assassination attempt on the president, former president or candidate, you need to resign. that is what stuart knight did. he was a republican appointee and he took responsibility and i think you need to reflect. this isn't a question of you, it is a question by the american people. you can't lead a secret service agency when there is on assassination attempt on a presidential candidate. i would say that about anyone who is running. so my question, what is the difference between your position and what stuart knight did?

ms. cheatle: what i will tell you is that i'm dedicated to finding the answers to what happened, and like every secret service agent we don't shirk our responsibilities. i will remain on and be responsible to the agency commit to this committee, to the former president and to the american republic. rep. khanna: is there a reason you wouldn't do what stuart knight did after the reagan assassination attempt? ms. cheatle: i believe i provided an answer. rep. khanna: there is nothing more you have to say? do you believe how divided how -- the country is and the questions asked, that your service in this role is the best for the nation? i'm not saying you can't do public service again. do you genuinely believe that being in this role is what is right or america at this moment? do you think there are trump supporters who have confidence in you? we have to have agencies in this country that are transcending

politics, that have the confidence of independence, democrats, republicans. do you believe the majority of this country has confidence in you right now? ms. cheatle: i believe the country deserves answers and i'm committed to finding those answers and providing those answers. rep. khanna: i believe that you should resign. i think colleagues on both sides of the i'll believe that and i hope you will consider it varied i yield back -- consider it. i yield back. chair comer: the chair recognizes mr. palmer from alabama for five minutes. rep. palmer: did local law enforcement issue teams have authority to engage with a perceived threat? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. palmer: why do you think they did not use it? ms. cheatle: i believe they follow the same use of force. rep. palmer: when you have compromised authority you don't need permission if you perceived

threat. there were not just esu units but local law enforcement that had line of sight on the shooter before shots were taken. one of my questions is, there was supposed to be a briefing with the secret service sniper units, the counter assault team with the contract team, the local esu teams. it did not take place. why was that? ms. cheatle: i have been told there has been a briefing, there was a briefing that took place. rep. palmer: i have been told there wasn't one. ms. cheatle: we are looking into the facts of the investigation. rep. palmer: let me ask you this. when were you informed that there was a credible threat against president, former president trump? when did he learn -- when did you learn that? ms. cheatle: the -- former president has a number of threats -- rep. palmer: i didn't ask that. there was a credible threat from iran. when were you informed? ms. cheatle: we have been

monitoring the threats -- rep. palmer: you knew before the rally. ok? the site security plan is generally drafted by the site supervisor and the site agent probably out of the pittsburgh district office. did they take into account the credible threat against trump? ms. cheatle: our personnel take into account the threats -- rep. palmer: why would they leave the building, i will correct the distance, it was 140 yards with a clear line of sight to the president. why was the building not occupied on the roof? you could put barney fife on the roof and keep someone from getting up there. why wasn't that done? ms. cheatle: the plan developed that day encompassed a number of security mitigations. rep. palmer: the issue is, the site supervisor, the site agent and the special agent in charge

who i think signed off on the plan, didn't include that in the inner perimeter and they didn't have a plan to secure the building. as i understand it, the butler county esu unit was situated on the second or of a building next to it but they didn't have a clear line of sight to the roof. the angle was too severe. the photograph taken of the young man, the shooter, when he had the rangefinder was taken at 5:15 p.m., it wasn't until 538 that the photograph was to the secret service sniper units. i don't understand the communication process. i don't understand why people didn't perceive that as a credible rep. on the video, it was clearly a credible threat. how is it that all of these mistakes could be made? how many explosive devices were

found on or near the site? ms. cheatle: again, i would have to do for to the fbi. rep. palmer: i believe they were in his car. i think there might have been one near a main gas line. it wasn't just the fact that he had a rifle, he had the ability to inflict enormous harm, enormous numbers of casualties had the devices exploded. i want to know also. when your agents conduct a site review, are they fully informed of all the threats in the -- that are being made against the principal they are protecting? ms. cheatle: what i can tell you is when our agents go to conduct in advance, their whole goal is to ensure -- rep. palmer: i understand the goal.

the failure to secure the building not only put the president, the former president's life in danger but the lives of individuals in the crowd in danger as well. the reagan shooting, there were other people shot at that time as well. and the secret service members lives were in danger. so i don't understand how you can continue to stay in the position you are in when this was a failure of historic magnitude. forty-three years without anything like this happening and failed in this case in a spectacular way. i yield back. chair comer: chair recognizes mr. infamy -- mfume from maryland. >> i want to commend you on your plate statement work will holding this hearing word -- and holding this hearing where we will attempt to get

answers. some of us grew up in an era not unlike what we see today in terms of political violence some of us remember the november 22, 1963 assassination of president kennedy. some of us like myself remember two days later when jack ruby on live tv shot and killed lee harvey oswald. we've seen over and over since that time, these kinds of attempts, whether it was the assassination of martin luther king or bobby kennedy or the attempted attack on george wallace in maryland, the shooting in 1981 of ronald reagan, or steve scalise, our friend and colleague in d.c., and the unfortunate attack on paul pelosi and now regarding former president trump. let me try to look at this is

-- people just assume whoever is in charge takes full responsibly when there has never been, on this magnitude and scale, this sort of failure. so when members ask, are you going to resign, and you say you have no intention to, they are perplexed, like many people who watch what's going on. and there are some things i don't understand, why was the building, the arg building, placed outside of the perimeter when clearly it was close enough for someone to launch an attack? ms. cheatle: sir, we are looking into the details on how the advanced was comprised but i can tell you there was overwatch on the building provided. rep. mfume: by a drone? ms. cheatle: i'm not going to get into specifics of technology or aspects used. rep. mfume: i think it is fair to say the overwatch failed because the shooter got on the

roof and stayed there for a while and people pointed him out. do you think you're overwatch was a failure in that case? ms. cheatle: i think we need to know the full details to understand how this occurred. rep. mfume: why was the rooftop left naked to begin with? can you tell us that, considering it was within the line of sight and very close? ms. cheatle: can't speak to the specifics of this particular event site but what i can tell you is when the secret service develops in advance plan, they take into account a number of factors when they are building advance. if there are buildings of concern or areas of concern, the overwatch is one of those mitigations they want to put in place, they will cover off areas of responsibility. rep. mfume: i understand. the shooter came to the attention of your agency 52 minutes before the former president got to the stage. did anyone get a sign to watch

her cover -- or cover the individual who had already been seen by -- with the advanced finder on him, and other suspicious matters? was anyone assigned to track him? ? ms. cheatle: a suspicious individual -- rep. mfume: i know. ms. cheatle: was brought to the attention of personnel. having a rangefinder at an outdoor event -- rep. mfume: when this physicists -- the suspicious person was brought -- brought to the attention of the secret service was anyone in the detail ordered to stay with that suspicious person because they might become a draft -- a threat? ms. cheatle: we have a number of teams on the ground. we are trying to verify the timelines of when the notifications were made to personnel so they could assume the responsibility of trying to track that individual. rep. mfume: there has been a lot of discussions, some of which raised itself earlier in the

hearing, about poor staff morale within your agency. i have the july 17 report of government executive which is a credible reporting service for the federal government, for employees. the 2023 ranking of places to work within the federal government showed, this is through the office of personnel management, that the secret service came in 413 out of 459. can you explain that? ms. cheatle: certainly. i can tell you the secret service is a difficult job. it challenges our employees daily. it's holidays, weekends. it is no leave. rep. mfume: madam. people come to work knowing that. you do explain that when you hire somebody? it is the same with other agencies. they mess holidays and work at odd hours. but to be one of the worst

places to work in the federal government? 413 out of 459? i need an explanation. as the director what do you think? chair comer: that is the last question but please answer. ms. cheatle: i think this is a challenging job. it is a challenging environment to be in law enforcement and we have a no fail mission. our task -- our folks are tasked for that every day. i have taken a number of measures since i have been the director to recruit and retain and stem the tide of attrition in our agency which will hopefully alleviate some of that. rep. mfume: thank you. chair comer: mr. sessions from texas. rep. sessions: i join in the calls to our members to say thank you for doing this on a bipartisan basis. actor, i'm not going to say you ought to resign but i am going to say you have not given us

confidence that you have the ability to understand what happened, to take the responsibility in terms of understanding. you have spent a number of years, how many years have you been with agency? ms. cheatle: 29. rep. sessions: i spent 16 years with at&t, moved seven times and have a good feel about their operations, how they worked, what was acceptable, who was responsible. and i have heard you say numbers of times today, you have to wait. you've got to wait. wait for the final report. when is the final final going to happen? ms. cheatle: i am -- rep. sessions: how long do we have to wait before you can give us credible answers? you have been there 28 years. you have had a few days to draw your own analysis of this. you should understand the entire process. you talk about being on the

team, perhaps in georgia. talked about your experience, you talked about the professional nature of the agency. that i don't doubt. but the director, just like it was when i ran my operations at at&t, was responsible to make sure they worked. in business it either works or it doesn't. there is no in between. it either works or it doesn't. in your job as the administrator, the director, you make sure it looks right and works. i have not heard you say one thing about my analysis is, i have asked these questions. it is always i have to sit back and wait for someone else to decide that. i will ask you a question maybe you can answer. have any employees been disciplined for their role in butler? in the incident? ms. cheatle: no sir, not at this time. i am asking these questions. rep. sessions: no employees have been disciplined?

no employees have been placed in any position that would place their job in jeopardy nor their standing in the agency? ms. cheatle: we are still in the process -- rep. sessions: that's not what i asked. you run the place. you know right from wrong, good from bad. you have had a number of days and you come before this committee knowing you are going to be before us, and you have to slough it off to someone else. do you see where there was something that went wrong as a professional at the agency of 28 years, or do you have to count on someone else to give you the final work? ? ms. cheatle: i see that something went wrong and i acknowledge that something went wrong. rep. sessions: what went wrong? was the special agent in charge not doing their job? was the shooter given extra time? was the sniper doing their job? these are things people who have

been around for 28 years can analyze quickly. i watched it live on tv and within minutes saw a number of facts and factors that could have and should have known by people who were there. you have 28 years. you are telling us and the public, i have to wait for the final answer. what is your evaluation? ms. cheatle: i'm asking those same questions -- rep. sessions: you were before the committee. tell us what went wrong, a special agent agent in charge, the person who was there. telus and don't try to play a shell game with us. do you have the ability to effectively as the director of the agency understand what went wrong, and at least tell us, i do or don't know what i'm doing? we come away, and i'm not asking for you to resign. i'm asking if you've got this experience, you should be able to say to us, we know what we

did wrong. it was a failure in our system and we are immediately making these corrections. that is what you have a difficult time with this group of members of congress. because we saw it. we have seen the things but you are the 28 year expert. you are the person that, and only you, that can make the changes. i hear you say, i have to wait for a final report before i come up with 28 years experience -- that is why we think you are doing, the answers you are giving us, are not direct and you -- correct and you are not using your professional expertise. mr. chairman, i will allow her to respond. ms. cheatle: i'm asking the same questions and i assure you, when i have a full and complete report of what happened, there will be accountability. we will make changes.

chair comer: out of curiosity, it has been nine days. every american once these questions answered. do you have a ballpark estimate of when you would be able to answer what mr. sessions asked? ms. cheatle: i can tell you on mission insurance internal investigation we are targeting to have that completed within 60 days. there's also an external investigation taking place. there are office of inspector general investigations and we are working in concert. there is the department of justice fbi criminal investigation. chair comer: ms. cossey of cortez from new york -- ocasio-cortez from new york. >> we are currently in the midst of an especially concentrated

presidential campaign that is paired with elections happening across the country, happening in about 100 days. so the notion of a report coming out in 60 days, when the threat environment is so high in the united states, irrespective of party, is not acceptable. i think it is important to understand that. this is the other. this not theater, jockeying, this is about the safety of some most highly targeted and valued targets, internationally and mystically, in the united states. the idea that a report will be finalized in 60 days, let alone prior to any actionable decisions that would be made, is simply not acceptable. it has been 10 days since the assassination attempt on a former president of the united states regardless of party. there need to be answers.

this committee, this is not a moment of theater. we need to make policy decisions and we have to make them now. . and that maybe that may require , legislation or policy we must pass in the immediate term and without that, we are flying blind. so the lack of answers and the lack of a report is not something we can accept here. director cheatle, is there a standard perimeter the secret service establishes around an event or are they independently determined per event and scenario? ms. cheatle: there is no standard. every event and venue is different and treated as such. rep. ocasio-cortez: so each event has a different perimeter that is established depending on the logistics of the event. you established earlier that the building upon which the shooter

operated from was outside of that established perimeter, correct? for the butler event? ms. cheatle: it was outside of our perimeter yes. rep. ocasio-cortez: that building was i believe, 500 -- how far away was the building from the president? ms. cheatle: it was approximately 200 yards. rep. ocasio-cortez: 200 yards. now, the individual used in ar-15 in order to act out his assassination attempt. they ar-15 has a range of about if in 600 yards. my question, why does the secret service perimeter, why is the protective perimeter shorter than one of the most popular semi weapons in the united states? ms. cheatle: there are a number of weapons out there with a

number of ranges. an advance was completed. the determination of the perimeter, i will not speak the specifics but there are factors that are taken into account when we determine our perimeter. some has to do with terrain or buildings, some has to do with assets and resources that are available. rep. ocasio-cortez: what i am hearing is that a perimeter was not established outdoors, at an outdoor venue, that would prevent the ar-15, one of the most common weapons used in a mass shooting, from being able to be within the range of secret service protection. ms. cheatle: a perimeter was established and even though there were buildings that were outside of the perimeter, it wasn't just the building. there were a number of buildings in the area. there was overwatch created to help mitigate some of those buildings. rep. ocasio-cortez: respectfully , as well, as a person who has

experienced an enormous amount of threat incidents, including incidents that have never been publicly reported, there is a common pattern that happens here. whether it is secret service, fbi, police, local departments, after a critical security failure we hear there will be an independent investigation. the investigation gets set up and the expectation is between 2-3 months of the incident and nothing really occurs from there. the report is usually not satisfactory to the questions being raised here. most importantly, corrective action is rarely taken. if i were to state anything that is profoundly important, we need answers to the public, ideally i would encourage you and the

agency to be more forthright with the members that have yet to have their questioning because the public deserves to have full confidence and the stakes are too high. the violence that could break out in this political moment, regardless of party, in the event of someone getting hurt, constitutes a national security threat to the entire country. thank you and i yield back. ms. cheatle: can i go back? if i could speak to something you said at the outset when you started your questioning. i want to assure you and everyone on the committee that i'm not waiting for a report to take action. we have been conducting analysis all along and we have been adding additional features to our security details since the incident occurred. rep. ocasio-cortez: i would hope you can highlight and build -- illuminate what those are. chair comer: chair recognizes

the gentleman from arizona. rep. banks: i request the photo go into the record. your agency has a no fail mission and on july 13 or agent he failed. this resulted in the death of one man and serious injury to two rally attendees beside the injuries to president trump. it is unfathomable that a 20-year-old on the radar of secret service and law enforcement was able to climb on the roof of the building and fire multiple rounds before he was neutralized. was he acting alone? ms. cheatle: i would have to refer you to the fbi investigation. rep. biggs: was he a lone gunman. ms. cheatle: would have to refer you to the fbi investigation for motive. rep. biggs: what did the technical service determine would be the event perimeter? ms. cheatle: those are questions

we are asking. rep. biggs: you are sitting here today, everybody said this. you knew you would be asked that question because it has been asked multiple times. this is an easy one. what would they determine would be the event perimeter? you should know that. this is not, i have to wait until someone else tells me. what was it? ms. cheatle: i don't want to speak to specifics of the event -- rep. biggs: this is a specific. this is a specific you ought to know. as someone said the buck stops with me, i will stay in my job and give answers to the american people and i know what happened, except he will not tell us and you will not tell the american people and you said in an interview that that foments the notion of conspiracy theories. guess what? when you sit here and were heatedly tell people, -- repeatedly tell people i have to wait, it frustrates people in

this committee. guess what? it undermines your credibility and whether you will really get to it. what did the technical service division determine would be the event perimeter? ms. cheatle: we are still gathering reports. we are interviewing individuals -- rep. biggs: you know what it is, you aren't going to tell us. ms. cheatle: when i have. those details i will share them. rep. biggs: was the gun already on the roof. did the shooter carry the gun up with him? ms. cheatle: i don't have that information at this time. rep. biggs: when was the last sweep of the roof done prior to the rally? ms. cheatle: i do not have the information at this time. rep. biggs: comedy holds, -- how many holds, many of us have been at events and secret service has been there, there has been security and i can't tell you how many times there will be a security hold so we will wait and we wait two or three minutes.

and yet we are hearing from you apparently there were no holds in place. ever instituted here with president trump's going on stage. you said, and i think this is connected, you said they hadn't adjudicated the shooter to be a threat. he was adjudicated to be a suspicious person although we have dynamic video, so my question for you is, and i think you answered this but i want to see if you are consistent with what you said an hour and a half ago. what do you do if a suspicious person is identified by the agency? ms. cheatle: at a number of our events it is not unusual -- rep. biggs: i know it's not unusual. what you do? ms. cheatle: the individuals identified as suspicious, we will send teams out -- rep. biggs: was a team sent out here? ms. cheatle: there were teams that were sent to identify and interview the individual.

rep. biggs: they were sent to interview the individual who scampered up in camo on top of a roof within 130 yards of his target. did your team get there? when did your team get there to conduct the interview? ms. cheatle: i don't have details on the timeline. rep. biggs: so if you did, if the team did, if they interview him, you described earlier, why didn't they put a security hold on president trump going on stage at the rally? ms. cheatle: that a number of our protective sites there are suspicious individuals identified all the time. it doesn't necessarily mean they constitute a threat. rep. biggs: of course not but here you have a guy scampering up the side of the building on top of a roof. it is identified to you and you sent a team.

and you can answer that death can't answer that. that gets to one of my finer points. we can have these interview sessions, five-minute, everybody gets to kiss the pig, and she gets to stonewall us and not deliver answers. so we will put together a congressional committee. same crap will happen. i'm calling, and i will support that but i will tell you this. i'm calling on the speaker to give us, and put together a truly independent commission of qualified former secret service agents and presidential protective services people who can actually conduct this kind of investigation and give us real answers because i don't think you are going to give us those answers. you should have come today ready to give answers. i call upon you to resign today. today. i would also say i have a bunch

of uc requests if i can go ahead. chair comer: proceed. rep. biggs: i apologize. it might take a moment. anthony, the secret service spokesman. one from him. article u.s. secret service is proof -- previously denied request, secret service says it denied request for more federal resources. denying some request by trump campaign. without objection. luminary findings by senator ron johnson and his committee. chair comer: without objection so ordered. rep. biggs: owes entitled notice anything different about trump's secret service detail? former biden officials says they must turn fire on donald trump to beat him. secret service is says the buck stops with her but she will not resign. mark hamill? joke about trump is bandaged following assassination attempt. biden i have engagement in sight.

i'm talking about a threat to democracy. a piece called who is secret service chief kimberly cheatle? rob is solely responsible for violent rhetoric that led to an attempt on his life. video actors pushes theory trump assassination trip was stage. -- staged. report secret service identified roof top as a potential vulnerability days before the rally. blackrock removes and showing -- advertisement showing potential assassin. secret service director, we didn't put snipers on the roof as it was kind of sloped. here is what thomas matthew crooks did leading up to the assassination attempt. director under scrutiny for diversity initiatives. troubleshooting makes no sense -- trump shooting makes no sense. >> i'm happy to assent to all of them.

rep. biggs: is it too tedious? rep. raskin: we are not hearing them anyway. but it is up to you. rep. biggs: i can slow it down. i'm probably going to fast. secret service explanation for security failures up to assassination attempt are betting up. u.s. reportedly received intel of a rainy and plot to assassinate president trump. wta secret service as they didn't put any agents on the roof because slight slope was too dangerous. u.s. officials received intel of iran plot. exclusive gop representative cloud, agencies interfering in-house assassination investigation. why trump's raised fist after assassination attempt is triggering for liberal media? questions over the security lapse reviving concerns over secret service.

secret service scrambles to shift blame after trump shooting as backlash hits hard. nobody contacted me. must-see six camera split screen of assassination attempt captures everything shooter was in open to plus minutes. -- two plus minutes. five reasons you should be angry. shooter spotted up to 30 minutes before firing reported multiple times. pictures taken, no one stopped him. 30 minutes between noticing and neutralizing shooter a very short period of time. secret service director says the buck stops with me on trump assassination attempt but will not resign. chair comer: ms. cheatle: we can -- chair comer: without objection, we will enter for the record all of those and we will take up the others are the next speaker. rep. brown: i want to highlight certain comments from ranking member raskin. my colleagues on both sides of

the aisle, president biden vice , president harris, and that is political violence is completely unacceptable in this country, full stop. it is an assault on our democracy itself and i am devastated by this attack on a candidate for the president for the office of the highest office in the land and continue to pray for the victims of the shooting and their families. as someone who has known gun violence firsthand, no one should have to experience the pain of losing a loved one to weapons of war. it is deeply unfortunate political violence has become far too common. where there it it -- whether it is the deadly attack on the capitol on january 6, the assault on speaker pelosi's husband, or the threats of violence against election workers, we all must work to condemn political violence and tone down the rhetoric. so director cheatle, on behalf of hard-working men and women of the secret service, can you give us some perspective as to what

goes into securing an event like the rally, like how much time do you have to prepare? ms. cheatle: thank you for the question. generally, when we receive notification that this would be an event taking place at a venue, the advance team assignments are made and there is a five-day process to conduct walk-throughs, coordinate with staff, local staff, and whether it be campaign staff or the protectee. and then, with local law enforcement on where the perimeter is going to be, the size and scope of the event, how many attendees there are going to be if it's an indoor rally, , outdoor rally, what sort of assets are available locally, what assets the secret service can bring to bear and what the scope of the event, the staff is trying to accomplish. rep. brown: to that point how many agents are recommended or requested as opposed how many were assigned? ms. cheatle: not going to get

into specifics of how many were assigned, but those numbers that were requested were provided. rep. brown: and how many local agents were involved in the preparation, if you will, that you talked about, that five-day preparation? ms. cheatle: there were a number of local agents from the local office, as well as agents from the former trump detail that were involved in the advanced process. rep. brown: do we have a number. ms. cheatle: i do have a number. i'm not going to release that number in this setting. rep. brown: you are not making this easy for us. a shocking incident on the former presidents life and appalling instance of political violence and a threat to our democratic values. i am thankful that former president is on the mend. i'm grieving for the family and friends of corey comperatore who lost a loved one in the shooting, and now know the unbearable pain of gun violence. i really hope this serves as it

-- a reminder about our responsibility to attack policies, not personalities, to be honest and truthful and to treat one another with dignity, respect and thoughtfulness. i yield my remaining time to ranking member raskin. rep. raskin: thank you, ms. brown, for those very powerful and moving remarks. director cheatle, we don't want to lose a presidential candidate to an ar-15. -- ar-15 attack. we cannot lose a presidential candidate to an ar-15 attack in -- and we can't lose anymore citizens to ar-15 mass violence, mass shootings. and we certainly don't want an attempted ar-15 assassination or assassination attempt to set off political violence or riots in america. so this is deadly serious business. the vice ranking member pointed

out that a report in 60 days won't do it for us. we have a responsibility. members of congress have a responsibility to take action now if there is anything we can do to prevent this. my question for you is, what is informing your operational decisions right now that you have invoked? without a report. can you tell us what other preliminary judgments or if you don't want to foreshadow, the report, fine but what are your personal professional judgments informing operational decisions you are making right now? ms. cheatle: certainly, and i appreciate that question. i don't want to make any preliminary judgments on what happened on this particular day but i can tell you that we have looked at as we did immediately in the aftermath what the security plan for the republican national convention was going to be and we made adjustments to

the interior perimeter there. we looked at the protectees that we have here in washington, d.c. area and protected sites. we made adjustments to their security posture. as we move the next several weeks, even yesterday with the announcement of the president no longer running, we have made adjustments to the vice president's detail. we are already prepared for an eventual vp nominee and we continue to make those assessments. i think it shows how dynamic the environment is that the agency works in everyday. rep. raskin: so you made the common sense judgments and intuitive recommendations that members of the public and members of congress are asking about right now? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. raskin: thank you. i yield back. chair comer: i have to say, director, we're pretty close to the halfway point during this and you answered more questions

with the abc reporter then you have with members of congress. we have a lot more questions. the american people are demanding that we get answers to those questions on that is the purpose of the hearing today. i'm sure a lot of the questions that have already been asked will be asked again, and hope only we can get some answers to those questions. i strongly implore you to answer those questions. you are here with the subpoena and we expect you to answer questions. the chair recognizes ms. mace from south carolina. rep. mace: thank you, mr. chairman. director cheatle, the american people are watching and they are wondering if there are any questions you can answer honestly today. i have a series of questions, specific questions and i want specific answers. most of my questions will demand a yes or no answer you understand? ms. cheatle: do. rep. mace: ok. my first question, both sides of the aisle today have asked for your resignation. what you like to use my five

minutes to draft your resignation letter, yes or no? ms. cheatle: no, thank you. rep. mace: was this a colossal failure? ms. cheatle: it was a failure. rep. mace: yes or no, was it a colossal failure? ms. cheatle: i have been admitted -- rep. mace: this is yes or no. was it a colossal failure? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. mace: was the tragedy preventable, yes or no? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. mace: because the secret service been transparent with this committee? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. mace: would you say the fact that we had to issue a subpoena to get you to show up today as being transparent, yes or no? ms. cheatle: i have always been -- rep. mace: yes or no. we had to issue a subpoena to get you to show up today. that is not transparent by the way. you said earlier secret service is not political, is that correct? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. mace: would you say leaking your opening statement to punchbowl news, "politico"

playbook and "washington post" several hours before you send it to this committee as being political, yes or no? ms. cheatle: i have no idea how my statement got out. rep. mace: well, that's bullshit. mr. chairman, i would like to ask unanimous consent to enter into the record articles by punchbowl the record articles by -- articles by plentiful news, political playbook "washington , post," all done at 5:24 a.m., 6:12, three or four hours before the committee got your statement. chair comer: so ordered. rep. mace: is the secret service fully cooperating with our committee? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. mace: ok. you said you are fully cooperating with this committee. on july 15 this committee since that sent you a list of demands of information we want. has the secret service provided this committee a complete list of all law enforcement personnel

that were there that day? have you provided a list of the oversight committee? yes or no? ms. cheatle: i will have to get back to you. rep. mace: that is a no. have you provided all audio and video recordings in your possession to this committee as we asked on july 15, yes or no? ms. cheatle: ms. cheatle: i would have to get back to you. rep. mace: you are being completely dishonest. >> we have to maintain decorum in this committee no matter how upset we get. ms. cheatle: have you provided all memorandums for the secret service? you are being dishonest with this committee. these are important questions the american people want answers to and you are just dodging and talking in generalities. we had to subpoena you to be here and you will not answer the question. we have asked you repeatedly to answer our questions. these are not hard questions.

have you provided us all communications from the secret service related to that day and rally? have you provided any of this information that this committee has asked of the secret service, any of it? ms. cheatle: i will have to get back to you. rep. mace: did you even read the letter we sent you? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. mace: you've said you have no idea. the answer is no, we have not gotten a single piece of data from you for your agency related to the rally we ask you for. was this attempted assassination of donald trump a failure of training, or execution, or both? ms. cheatle: i think those are answers we need to -- rep. mace: training, execution, or both? how many secret service personnel have lost their jobs due to this colossal failure? ms. cheatle: at this time, none.

rep. mace: how many secret service personnel have been required to take a refresher course on how not to let people shoot donald trump? ms. cheatle: our personnel are currently operational. we are examining the facts of this investigation. we will make the changes necessary. rep. mace: what time did law enforcement become aware there was an individual on the roof with a clear line of sight to president trump? ms. cheatle: i am still verifying timelines. rep. mace: of course, nine days income you have no answers. how many minutes between the photos and the shooting? ms. cheatle: i am still verifying the timeline. rep. mace: 57 minutes. thank you, mr. chairman, and i yield back. chair comer: i believe i want to recognize him for unanimous consent. >> i beg your indulgence. i meant to do this earlier. i would like to have unanimous consent that it be submitted for the record the 2023 ranking of best and worst workplaces in the

federal government compiled by the office of personnel management which shows the united states secret service coming in 413th out of 459 sub agencies. this appears in the july 17 edition. chair comer: without objection, so ordered. the chair recognizes ms. stansberry from new mexico. rep. stanton: great -- rep. stansberry: the importance of this hearing is this is not just a single shooting. this is about national security and the security of our democracy. it is not just one operational failure. this is about our public officials safe and what does that signal to the country and the world about american security and the ability of our officials to do their jobs

safely. i want to start by saying thank you to our brave men and women in uniform whether the secret service or local law enforcement who put their lives on the line. obviously, we honor their service. this is really about operational failures and what it means for our country at large. i also want to reaffirm we must condemn unequivocally political violence of any kind, violence of any kind, not just political violence, and it cannot be tolerated in this democracy, and also to offer my prayers for the slain fire chief and also prayers for those who have been injured. the tone of this hearing is, how is it that a 20-year-old young man with a gun that was legally purchased by his father could on the day of a rally go to a gun shop, legally purchased

ammunition, show up to a secured site and not only attempt the assassination of a political figure but kill and injure two others? how could this happen? i am not asking you. i think we have had a lot of testimony here today. i'm going to talk a little bit about the timeline. here is what we know. i know, director, you were also on the call we had a few days ago with the fbi and other law enforcement. i respect that you are not able to share, based on your testimony, some details currently being investigated, but i know you were on the call. you heard them, too. on july 3, the rally was announced that it was going to be in butler. july 6, three days later, we know the shooter searched for dates for trump and dnc events. july 7, four days after the announcement, the shooter went

to the site. he physically went to the site. july 12, the shooter went to a gun range where he and his dad regularly go and practiced shooting. the next day on july 13, he went to the site again before the rally began. we know he then went and searched online for a gun store where he went and purchased 50 rounds of ammunition, went home, got his father's a.r., which was legally purchased, and returned to the venue. at 5:00 that evening, more than an hour before donald trump took the stage that evening, local law enforcement were made aware there was a suspicious man. in fact, at 5:20, local law enforcement flag that he had a rangefinder and they radioed

their concerns and sent around pictures of the individual. cat5: 40, 20 minutes before local law enforcement -- at 5:40, 20 minutes before local law enforcement identify the shooter, secret service was notified of the suspicious person by state police. that was before donald trump even took the stage for that was 11 minutes before he took the stage. secret service was aware there was a suspicious person. at 6:03, he took the stage. at 6:09, rally goers identified him climbing on the roof. three rounds of shots were heard and the president and the other victims were shot. this shooter was a 20-year-old young man, no criminal record, legally purchased gun and ammunition, who, for days in the

lead up to the shooting was searching mask shooter screwed he even had a picture of a mask shooter on his cell phone the day of the shooting. he searched for explosives. he searched high-level officials. the american people want to know , how did a 20-year-old young man with access to a military style weapon bring it onto an unsecured perimeter who for days have been planning a mass shooting? i think that, madam director, with all the respect, the answers we have received here in this hearing today are completely unsatisfactory. how could this happen? we need answers. we need answers not just for

the family members of the gentleman killed and those injured but we need answers for our democracy. because, as others have stated here today, we are in a highly politically charged environment right now. we are only weeks away from one of the most significant presidential elections in american history. it is clear that our public officials' safety has not been secured. it is not just a matter of one shooting. it is a matter of national security. i hope that you will take our comments to heart. i hope that there will be accountability, and we need answers. i yield back. chair comer: the chair recognizes the representative from kansas. >> i have a question right off the bat, something you bragged about repeatedly issue increased protection for the 36 individuals the secret service is also entrusted with. is that correct? ms. cheatle: i think i stated we

currently have 36 protectees and we continue to make evaluations on where those levels of protection are provided. >> you mentioned specific increases in protection you provided for some of those individuals, correct? based on what? ms. cheatle: some of it has been as a road built of the tragic incident -- result of the tragic incident that occurred on the 13th. we went back and assess where we were providing protection and wanted to make sure we were not overlooking anything considering this most recent incident. >> the secret service needed to learn that allowing a rooftop 150 yards away from a protectee, not putting that in a perimeter, not having someone guarding that roof, that information is new to you and has caused you to increase protection to other folks under your care? ms. cheatle: i think it is prudent after any incident that occurs to go back and look at your current practices and see if there is anything that needs to be done differently. >> it is inconsistent.

what you said earlier to mr. turner was that the protection you were offering to president trump was in-line line with the current threats, him being a former president, being the nominee of a major political party, the threats from iran, the protection you were providing was adequate. do you stand by that statement? ms. cheatle: yes. >> do you think it is a problem americans up our street trust in the federal government is at an all-time low? ms. cheatle: i think it is unfortunate. >> i do not know why you are quibbling with my word. is it a problem or not? ms. cheatle: i think the american public deserves to have trust in their federal government. >> ok, i do not know why you are being difficult. it is a simple question. are you concerned about the increasing prevalence of conspiracy theories going on out there right now? ms. cheatle: yes. >> i am, too. you have been incredibly inconsistent in your answers today. you have acknowledged the

shooter was identified with a rangefinder, that president trump's detail was sufficient for the threats he faced from iran, that certain details were erroneously reported, and your words, but you have not been willing to provide any information about the decision to place the building in question outside the perimeter, the use of a drone by the shooter, or when exactly the secret service identified the shooter as a threat rather than merely suspicious. what is your standard today for what you are willing to answer and what you are not? because you have been inconsistent. ms. cheatle: certainly come you can understand some of the information provided to you thus far has come from the fbi's investigation and information we have released. i want to make the information being provided to this committee is consistent and factual. >> the question about the drone the chairman asked at the beginning of the hearing, he said, do you know this information? you acknowledged that you know the information but do not want

to tell us. if you wanted to wait until the end of the investigation to draw conclusions, which you have acknowledged you are not, you are drawing conclusions right now making changes, but if that was your standard that you want to wait until the investigation to draw conclusions, at least you would be consistent in that. but what we are wanting to know today and what would dispel some of the conspiracy theories, what would increase trust with the american people, is for you to let the facts out, for you to tell us what you know. i want to understand from you, why is that a problem? why is it inconsistent with a quality investigation to release to the american people today at least the information that you know for sure? because you certainly know for sure more information then you are willing to give us today. ms. cheatle: i have released that there was a failure and that there are gaps that we need to make sure do not happen again. >> that is not acceptable. that is not enough. that does not quell any

conspiracy theories out there. in your 27 years of experience, would you have been concerned about an elevated location within 150 yards of a protectee that did not have a secret service presence? just based on your experience? ms. cheatle: what i can tell you is every site and venue -- >> i am asking for your experience, looking at the situation, with that have been a concern for you? would you have agreed it was fine and did not need to be covered? you're not going to answer. is it true approximately 18 minutes before president trump took the stage the beaver county emergency services unit noticed the shooter on the roof and photographed him? is that a fact or not? ms. cheatle: that is the information i have from the information i have from the fbi report, yes. >> you have not been willing to share whether or when this was communicated to the secret service. is it suspicious or threatening if an individual is seen around the perimeter with a rangefinder? is that just suspicious? ms. cheatle: that could be termed as suspicious.

>> if that same individual with the range founder -- rangefinder is found on a rooftop come is that still just suspicious or considered threatening? ms. cheatle: that could be termed still as suspicious. >> my time is over. i yield back. chair comer: the chair recognizes mr. frost from florida. rep. foster: thank you. i want to start by stressing political violence is always unacceptable and acknowledge this is still an ongoing investigation. oversight hearings like this are essential components of an investigation. i want to thank the chair for pulling this together. madam director, i appreciate you being here. the events of july 13 raise serious questions about the security protocols in place. the gravity of the fact that an unsophisticated gunman was able to secure his perch and take a shot at a former president despite multiple layers of security and intelligence are not lost on me. before i came to congress, i used two work advance for a

major political candidate and had interactions with law enforcement on events like what happened. how many times was a secret service alerted about a suspicious person at the july 13 campaign event prior to the first shot? ms. cheatle: i do not have an exact number to share with you today. but from what i have been able to discern, somewhere between two and five times, there was some sort of communication about a suspicious individual. rep. foster: to the secret service specifically. according to reports, the shooter was photographed twice prior to the shooting. a police officer saw the shooter on the ground and reported him with a photograph as a suspicious person. multiple local law enforcement officers identified the shooter, radioed he was acting suspiciously near the event. a local law enforcement tactical team saw the shooter on a roof and notified other security

services and also photographed him. one police officer who photographed the shooter saw him scoping out the roof and carrying a rangefinder. my question, and you have answered this, or you have not answered this, why was the event not caused right then -- paused right then? ms. cheatle: i am not clear on the timeline of when the secret service shift and counter sniper were notified. rep. foster: earlier, you said the secret service would have paused the rally if they identified a threat. ms. cheatle: correct. rep. foster: why was it not paused? ms. cheatle: because i have to assume they did not know there was a threat when they brought the president out on the stage. rep. foster: i feel like this is a breakdown in communication between local law enforcement, you all, and other actors at the rally. as someone who has worked on these, i understand there is multiple people with the ability

to make different decisions on the ground. over the last week, i have spoken with a lot of folks in local law enforcement in my district and across the country and other people have brought up concerns around being able to communicate with secret service during the big events and having their flags taken seriously. i do believe if secret service believed there was a legitimate threat that they would have paused the rally. my concern is before that, something with flags and it was not taken as seriously as it should have been taken. i think this shows an issue with communication. i want to know what you intend to do to fix that. not in 60 days but now. we are in the middle of a presidential election. a former president pattern essay summation -- assassination attempt. another rally-goer was killed due to the gun violence. we now have a presumptive

nominee of the other party, the first black woman to be running for president, so i am worried about everybody's life. what do you all intend to fix the commute case and break down and make sure that you take what local folks are saying more seriously? ms. cheatle: we take what local law enforcement relates to us seriously. let me be clear on that. rep. but not this time. ms. cheatle: we always trust our law enforcement partners and have a great relationship with them. we are looking at whether or not there was a communication breakdown. if that was the case, we will take steps to ensure that we correct that. because, to your point, we cannot have a communication breakdown. rep. foster: you mentioned the perimeter of the event did not include the rooftop where the shooter was. does your responsibility and the secret service's responsibility stop at the perimeter of the event? ms. cheatle: our responsibility

is to ensure the safety and security of the event itself and the protectee attending the event and the personnel protecting them. rep. foster: you the fact the rooftop was outside the perimeter is not an excuse? ms. cheatle: i am not offering that as an excuse. rep. foster: thank you. i yield back. chair comer: the chair recognizes mr. fouling from texas. rep. fallon: how did a 20 year old with one week's notice pick the best location to assassinate president trump when the entire secret service mystic? your agency got outsmarted and outmaneuvered by 20-year-old. how can we have any confidence you could stop professional individuals from nefarious actions? ms. cheatle: those are absolutely questions we need to answer. rep. fallon: we cannot have that confidence. do you have the authority to beef up security of any of your protectees? ms. cheatle: yes, i do.

rep. fallon:: were you aware present trump was facing a heightened security threat due to a foreign adversary? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. fallon: was heat provided the complement the sitting president would have? ms. cheatle: he was provided a full complement of security based on the threat assessment and the venue. rep. fallon: if he had been the sitting president, would he have had the same security is on july 13 or would it have been beefed up? ms. cheatle: there is a difference between the sitting president and -- rep. fallon: the answer is he did not. there is not a full canteen on site, there was not counter surveillance on site. you just said you have the ability to beef up the security. you knew about the threat and you did nothing. that is as telling as it is chilling. we have satellite images from the fairgrounds. have you visited the site?

ms. cheatle: i have not. rep. fallon: nine days and you have not visited the site? you should have been there that night. this evening, did you talk to the team, the heroes that surrounded the president? did you call them that night? ms. cheatle: they were still operationally working to protect the president. rep. fallon: you called them the next day, 72 hours after? ms. cheatle: i do not know the timeline. rep. fallon: i think it was 72 hours after. you waited three days. what is immediately clear if there are a number of structures that need to be secure. other than the first immediate four, what is the most dangerous site that should have been secured? you know security 101, you have to mitigate the high ground. ms. cheatle: yes. rep. fallon: you know what the next most dangerous site? what was the closest structure to the president? ms. cheatle: there are a number of structures around the event site. rep. fallon: the shooter knew. the shooter has visited the site

two more times than you have and he had a drone and he picked the agr building. your member the abc interview you did where you did not have people on the roof of the agr building because you were worried about safety because of the slope? ms. cheatle: i recall that statement. rep. fallon: does the secret service have a written policy to share with us about sloped roofs? ms. cheatle: no. rep. fallon: why did you act like there was one? is it your practice to comment on events of enormous national implications when you are ignorant of the facts? that is rhetorical. here is the thing with slopes. you can go to 1812, and you say there was a danger, a safety concern. but the problem is you put your counter snipers on eight 312 which is steeper than the 112 -- on a 312 which is steeper than the 112.

you can build a wheelchair ramp on a 112. all of the law enforcement i have spoken with over the last nine days are amazed the agr rooftop was not secured. you know i? because it is dangerous. i have never had any long gun training in my life. i own an ar-15, i shot at one time in my life, six years ago. that is until saturday when we re-created events in texas. i was lying prone on a sloped roof at 130 yards at 6:30 at night. i knew he had a scope. i did not know what kind. i shot eight rounds from both. you know what the result was? 15 out of 16 kill shot. the one i missed would have hit the president's ear. that is a 94% success rate. that shooter was a better shot than me! it is a miracle president trump was not killed. another man's life is over.

you know what else is dangerous? i believe your horrifying ineptitude and lack of skilled leadership is a disgrace. your obfuscating today is shameful. you should be fired immediately. i yield back. chair comer: the chair recognizes mislead from pennsylvania. rep. lee: i would like to thank the chair and ranking member for coming together in holding this hearing. i do not think any of our concerns have been addressed today. what little we have learned has not inspired must confidence -- much confidence. we cannot allow the violence we are seeing in this country to become commonplace but that seems to be where we are heading. on this occasion, it was shockingly a former president and current political candidate at a rally that we all assume is one of the most secure places we can be. the violence we saw last saturday is the same cultural violence that makes too many of

our community members feel unsafe to play outside or go to class or live their lives each day. this was a political rally. it is supposed to be one of the most secure places. we do have specific questions about that. i would like to start by following up on some of my colleagues' questions. my colleagues highlighted the shooter presenting in active threat. i would like you to clarify the protocol for postponing or canceling an event based on a threat and how the events on july 13 did not meet the standards. ms. cheatle: again, i think we are talking about the distinction between suspicious behavior and a threat. at the time this individual was identified, they were displaying suspicious behavior. i'm still waiting for interviews from the fbi to determine what it was that identified that individual as suspicious and what those behaviors were. rep. lee: is suspicious behavior, does it vary between

different events? if we have an event with a president, with their not be a heightened standard for suspicious behavior? ms. cheatle: i think there are a number of ways one could be identified as suspicious and it does not matter whether it is at a rally or indoor event or who the protectee is. i think it is up to law enforcement or citizens to identify someone as suspicious. rep. lee: ok, thank you. according to the associated press, at least six different agencies were involved in securing the rally in butler. when there are so many teams collaborating, who takes the lead and how is that determined? ms. cheatle: the secret service is responsible for the security of the site. rep. lee: that was the case on july 13? ms. cheatle: correct. rep. lee: and the 2024 budget, the secret service was given about $78 million above what was requested.

you have requested another increase. how much of these funds go towards training and improving protection procedures? ms. cheatle: i would have to get back to you on the training aspect of it. but about 30% of our budget is for protection and facilities and training. rep. lee: clearly, the problem cannot be a lack of funding. what do you see as the core problem that led to this failure, that led to your agency being outgunned by a 20-year-old using his father's done and acting on his own without a particularly sophisticated plan or technology? ms. cheatle: i think we are waiting to determine exactly what those failures were or what the failure was so we can make sure the secret service is stronger after this. rep. lee: we have heard a lot today that you cannot answer because it is an ongoing investigation, that you are still figuring out the details, and he will not answer basic questions. you said 60 days for the investigation. i simply do not think that is

acceptable. do you really plan to keep avoiding questions and the american people's questions for the next 60 days? ms. cheatle: i am not avoiding questions. i want to make sure i am providing factual and accurate information. rep. lee: certainly, but is there no in between between what is obviously a fact and what you can surmise from the details you already have? ms. cheatle: i assure you, when i have a full and complete report of what took place on that day, i will certainly come back and make that available. rep. lee: studies indicate the united states is experiencing increasing levels of political violence. does the secret service see that as a threat to its work? how is the secret service adapting strategies and protocols to account for increasing political violence? ms. cheatle: we are constantly evaluating the threats we receive and monitoring that. we make adjustments on a daily basis to our protectees based on what those threats are and what

actions we need to take. rep. lee: yes or no, do you believe stricter controls on the availability of assault weapons would make it easier for the secret service to fulfill its mission of protecting public officials? ms. cheatle: i think the secret service is tasked with providing a safe environment. that is why we put into place a number of mitigation factors. rep. lee: do assault rifles make it easier or harder for you to do? your job? ms. cheatle: any weapon makes it harder for us to do our job. rep. lee: i yield back. chair comer: the chair recognizes the representative from florida. >> real quick, at what time was secret service aware of the active threat against president trump? director? what time? ms. cheatle: the secret service was aware there was an individual who had been identified as suspicious and that individual was attempting to be tracked down.

>> at what time? ms. cheatle: i do not have a specific timeline. >> director, it has been nine days. at what time? ms. cheatle: i want to make sure i give you factual information. >> director. have you talked to the agents on the ground that day? ms. cheatle: yes, i have. >> you have talked to all of them? your senior team has talked to every agent on the ground that day? ms. cheatle: yes, we have. >> have a all corroborated the same time they identify the shooter or were made aware of the shooter by local attendees or the local police department? ms. cheatle: there are a number of reports of when those were made. >> was at five minutes before the first shot rang out? 10 minutes before? 15 minutes before the first shot rang out? ms. cheatle: it was less than that timeframe when it was identified as a threat. >> how many days before the shooting took place did secret service do their advance work to secure the facility the rally was going to be held at?

ms. cheatle: five days. >> in the five days prior, when the security advance team did their work, did they identify the rooftop as a potential threat? ms. cheatle: again, i am pulling those reports and information. >> it has been nine days. did they notice a roof top 150 yards away that was a potential threat? yes or no? ms. cheatle: i am the rooftop was noticed. i am pulling the reports. >> what were the security parameters around securing the rooftop? what did they do? ms. cheatle: there was overwatch provided for that rooftop. >> did overwatch fail? ms. cheatle: i am waiting to hear what the results of the investigation were so that i can identify where the failure was. >> who did you talk to that was on the ground that day that was responsible for overwatch? what are their names? ms. cheatle: i'm not one to provide their names in this setting. >> did you talk to the people

providing overwatch that day? ms. cheatle: i talk to the people that can do for the advance on that day and were working the shift in where the counter snipers on that day. >> you talked to the counter sniper team. you talk to the people providing overwatch and you talk to the advance team, correct? ms. cheatle: yes, sir. >> what did they tell you? ms. cheatle: we are putting together a comprehensive report so i can identify exactly where the gaps in the failures were. >> when the counter sniper team was on the roof and they identified there was suspicious activity on the roof in question, what was the chain of command orders around the person on said roof? i am quite sure somebody saw, under your organization, secret service, i am quite sure somebody saw the shooter on the roof. so, what was the communication through the chain of command to deal with said person? ms. cheatle: what i can tell you

is when the individual was identified by the counter sniper, they took one shot and neutralized that individual. >> but that was after the shooter already took a shot? ms. cheatle: correct. >> what you're saying now is the secret service did not see the shooter on the roof until after the shooter took a shot? ms. cheatle: i do not have all of those details at this time. >> if you do not have those details after nine days, director, what you're telling me is you guys did not see it. is that correct? ms. cheatle: i am telling you i do not have all the details of the statements at this time. >> director, it has been nine days. either you have the information or you do not. is that correct? ms. we are still in the process of conducting interviews and an investigation. >> some of my colleagues have texted me over the past several days, bipartisan, about whether you should lose your job. i have been quiet on that question because i wanted to see what you would do today.

in my opinion, you do need to be fired immediately. that is because this is gross incompetence. the fact it has been nine days, and these are simple questions to answer, i am quite sure if i asked any of my kids if they got in trouble and asked for details, i would get more answers from them. that is what is frustrating on a bipartisan basis, on a nonpartisan basis. this is a joke. director, you are in charge. that is why you need to go. mr. chairman, i yield back. chair comer: the chair recognizes mr. goldman of new york. rep. golden: thank you, mr. chairman. director, i want to follow up and understand a little bit why there is so much information about this in the public, including some from you and your communications team and yet you are here pursuant to a subpoena

under oath in front of congress and you are unable or unwilling to answer some of those same questions. can you explain why you are answering fewer questions here then you have to the media? ms. cheatle: i am answering the questions i am able to answer based on the fact there are multiple ongoing investigations. rep. goldman: you've answered some of these previously? did you have an interview with abc news? did you explain the interaction between local law enforcement and the secret service and that local law enforcement was responsible for securing the perimeter of the building where the shooter was? ms. cheatle: i said the secret service is responsible for designing, implementing, and executing the security plan

and we rely on the assistance of local enforcement partners to assist us with that plan. rep. goldman: were you given any instructions about what you cannot cannot answer here today? ms. cheatle: my ability to answer questions is solely reflective of the fact that there are multiple ongoing investigations. i want to make sure that i provide accurate information that does not conflict with any of those investigations going on. rep. goldman: is it your view that you cannot talk about anything that happened that day until those investigations are completed? ms. cheatle: my view is i want to make sure that this committee and the american public gets correct and actual information. rep. goldman: is it your view that can only happen after the completion of the investigation? ms. cheatle: it is my view that when the investigations are complete that we will be able to share that information. rep. goldman: how about before that? ms. cheatle: if i have factual

information that i can share before that, i absolutely will. rep. goldman: i am guessing you have factual information as to when they suspicious photograph, the photograph of a suspicious person, was relayed to the secret service. there is a timestamp on that text message or whatever it was. correct? ms. cheatle: i am sure you can understand when you are dealing with text messages, emails, and other communications, the timelines do not always match up. rep. goldman: not really, if they are time stamped. but let me move on. you have acknowledged this was a major security failure. do you acknowledge it was a major security failure not to secure the rooftop of the building the shooter shot from? ms. cheatle: i believe that this time that the rooftop was provided overwatch.

i acknowledge we are unaware at this time how the individual was able to access the roof. rep. goldman: overwatch meaning from other counter sniper or other higher points? ms. cheatle: correct. rep. goldman: was it a failure that when that shooter was on the rooftop that overwatch did not identify him before he fired his shots? ms. cheatle: i do not have the timeline of how the individual accessed the roof, where they accessed the roof, for how long they were on the roof. rep. goldman: let me ask a couple of things quickly. you have testified here about all the resources the secret service needed to deploy to protect the nato summit and all of the leaders here. is that right? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. goldman: did you have to rely more on local law enforcement because of the nato summit for this event? ms. cheatle: the secret service

routinely works with local law enforcement at every event. it does not matter whether it is a nato summit, the rnc -- rep. goldman: that is not my question. obviously, there is a natural give-and-take as to how many agents you deploy and how much you rely on local law enforcement. did you have to rely more on local law enforcement because there were fewer secret service assets available because of the nato summit? ms. cheatle: no. rep. goldman: i hope we get answers before the completion. i do not like the fact that the media has received far more answers than congress has. if this is a function of getting your ducks in a row, i assume you have access to a lot of these reports and information and should have come prepared today. i want to flag, mr. chairman, before i yield back that i want

to point out one thing my colleague from texas was talking about when he said he re-created the shooting twice with an ar-15 and had a 94% success rate, 15 out of 16 shots, i do not know why that does not convince him we should get rid of ar-15's. but clearly, we need to do something about the prevalence of ar-15's and weapons of war on our streets. i yield back. chair comer: the chair recognizes mr. perry from pennsylvania. rep. perry: i guess 60 days is the time of the investigation. is that the information you have put out? where did that come from, 60 days? ms. cheatle: i stated that earlier today. rep. perry:: 60 days. you receiving regular updates? you are in charge of the secret service proved this is about your organization, what happened

nine days ago, are you receiving regular updates from the fbi on their investigation? ms. cheatle: yes, i am. zelenskyy you know some things are true and some things are not true. we want to find out if they are true. you have been in touch with the fbi and are getting updates on a daily basis? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. perry: are you confident mr. crooks was the only person firing that day against the president or the crowd? is he the only one? i'm not asking you yet if he was acting alone. was he the only one? can you say that with certainty to the american people? ms. cheatle: that is the information i have at this time, yes. rep. perry: does it appear he acted alone? ms. cheatle: that is the information we have at this time. rep. perry: let's talk about the fact he was noticed as a person of interest, of concern, suspicion, as you say. your p.i. team, there is a sea of people, how does the p.i.

team get to that individual in question in the sea of people? how is that individual tracked? ms. cheatle: our protective intelligence teams are paired up with a local police counterpart, so they work in conjunction together. rep. perry: they just followed them around? let me ask you this. looking at the sites, you have multiple parameters. you have multiple parameters -- perimeters. was it the highest location? ms. cheatle: i believe the highest location is where our counter sniper's were. rep. perry: what about the water tower adjacent? how high is the water tower? ms. cheatle: i do not have the height of the water tower. rep. perry: it seems like water towers are pretty high, at least in the photo. there might be a building right behind the agr building even

higher than the building crooks fired from. you are familiar with cover, conceal? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. perry: how would your sniper or p.i. team tracked the vigil and give vectors to get to the individual to question him? how would you cover the concealment of low areas you cannot see from where your sniper team immediately adjacent to the president were s ited? how would you do that if you are not on the high ground? rep. perry: when our sniper teams -- ms. cheatle: when our sniper teams do the advance, they provide a good system our response teams are able to vector in if they see something that is troubling. rep. perry: so, when mr. jordan asked about the assets that were requested, let me ask you about assets requested. where aerial assets requested

for this event from either the secret service, state police, or anybody else? aerial assets, where they requested? ms. cheatle: i cannot speak to what the local police -- but i can tell you the assets requested from the secret service for the site that they were all granted. rep. perry: but were aerial assets requested? i did not ask if you used them or what you used, but were they requested? ms. cheatle: overwatch was requested. rep. perry: is that aerial? overwatch could be on the water tower or not on the water tower. can you be specific? i am running out of daylight here. ms. cheatle: i understand. if you are asking me about specifics -- rep. perry: is it not clear what i am asking? were aerial assets requested by anybody? ms. cheatle: the secret service, we felt we had a good plan in place. rep. perry: fair enough. how about canine assets with

bomb sniffing or explosive sniffing capabilities, where they requested? ms. cheatle: those requests were fulfilled. rep. perry: they were requested and fulfilled. once the crooks vehicle inside any of your perimeters? ms. cheatle: it was not. rep. perry: it was not. ok so it was not. was there a device located on mr. crooks' body to detonate the vehicle? ms. cheatle: that is the information i have. rep. perry: what would be the point of detonating the vehicle not inside the perimeter? ms. cheatle: i have no idea what mr. crooks' motivation was. rep. perry: the fact you have not even visited the site, i understand there are other things going on, but the culture of your organization, the culture -- do you know how tall the president is? president trump, how tall is he? ms. cheatle: he is over six feet tall. rep. perry: do you assign agents based on their ability to cover

physically and carry if necessary the president of the united states when you assign them to this mission? is that a parameter considered? ms. cheatle: i assign agents to work our protectees that are capable and have been trained by the secret service. rep. perry: i understand they are trained. but if you are not tall enough, we are not mad at you but if somebody is seven feet tall and you are five feet tall, there is going to be adult of their that is problematic in protecting the protectee. i am asking, is that a consideration when these agents are assigned to the protectee? ms. cheatle: the agents assigned to our protectees are perfectly capable -- rep. perry: the culture is what i am concerned about. the primary objective seems to be something other than securing the site, securing the principal, and securing the people at the site. that is the concern based on the answers you have given today so far. chair comer: the chair

recognizes mr. musk a >> -- m oskowitz from florida. >> thank you for this hearing. i want to thank ranking member raskin for the letter you sent to the committee. i also support the creation of a commission to get to the bottom of what happened. i want to give you an honest assessment of how this is going for you today. did you happen to catch the hearing many months ago in education where there were a bunch of university presidents and police the phonic -- elise stefanik asked an easy question and could not get an answer? did you see that hearing? >> let me tell you, did not go well. those university professors all resigned, they are gone per this is how this is going for you. this is where this is headed. this is -- i do not know who

prepared you for this. i do not know how many times you've testified in front of congress. but a president was almost assassinated live on television not just for americans but for the world to see. this being your first opportunity, i understand it is an ongoing investigation, i understand there are things you cannot talk about. but the idea that you are giving less than you did on television is something democrats, independents, and republicans are going to find unacceptable. my high school was on the list of mass shootings that represent of raskin held up. that day, the resource officer did not run into the building pretty he hid in the stairwell while the shooter was in the building. he stayed outside, never helped. he directed other officers who showed up on the scene not to go into the building. when it was determined the failures in response and training and that the sheriff

fired nobody in his agency, governor desantis removed that chair, i supported the removal. you say there will be accountability. you do not want to give us names. are you saying what it is concluded, you are prepared to fire the people on the ground who made poor decisions? ms. cheatle: i am prepared to take the actions necessary. rep. moskowitz: that is nonsense. accountability, the failure was human. that does not mean they are bad people. it means they failed that day, and a president was almost assassinated. are you prepared to fire the human failure on the ground? yes or no? when you have the names of where those failures were, they are people, it is not like a piece of technology field, people failed that day, are you prepared to fire them? ms. cheatle: i do not have an answer as to whether -- rep. moskowitz: how can there be

accountability if you are not prepared to fire someone? the reason why your name is going to be the person who is held accountable, the reason why members of this committee are calling for resignation, and i joined in that, or for the president to fire you, is because you say there will be accountability but you cannot commit that people are going to get fired. let me ask this question a different way. if trump had been assassinated that day, if the gunmen had succeeded, would you have come and tendered her resignation? -- your resignation? ms. cheatle: i would still be sitting here because i would want to ensure the integrity of the investigation. rep. moskowitz: that is a fair answer that you would have set up that process. but would you have had the honor to come in front of the committee and say a former president was assassinated on my watch, there should be new leadership? ms. cheatle: i think i have admitted -- rep. moskowitz: when you have tendered your resignation if he had been killed -- would you have tendered your resignation if he had been killed?

ms. cheatle: i think i have admitted i have taken accountability and will take responsibility. rep. moskowitz: ok. well, i want to follow up on represented conley's question in which he asked about guns and you were not willing to admit that makes your job harder. if there are over 4 million guns on the street, if all of those were machine guns, would it make your job harder to protect people? ms. cheatle: i think weapons are out there -- rep. moskowitz: if all of those guns were rocket propelled grenades, would that make your job harder? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. moskowitz: thank you! perfect. that is not a trick question. i will not ask the other 15 things. i was going to do drone strikes. but that is ok. it creates a challenging environment. it has nothing to do the the second amendment or people's rights, but it does make your job harder. credit to representative connolly for asking that

question. there was a question asked, is an arabian assassin more capable than a 20-year-old? i can tell you it is not iranians walking into schools and grocery stores and movie theaters and churches. it is 20-year-olds. some of them are mentally unstable. they have access to guns. they are domestic terrorists. christopher wray has talked about domestic terrorism. we collectively come together on foreign threats. i am not at all debasing the fact that there are foreign threats here and abroad. but there are domestic threats. we have to get to the bottom of how we stopped domestic terrorism because it was a 20 year old who walked into my high school and killed 17 people. chair comer: mr. timmons from south carolina.

rep. timmons: we have asked a lot of question and have not gotten a lot of straight answers. i have intentionally created a line of questioning i think you can answer. do you agree the allocation of secret service resources should correspond with the risk profile of any given event? a higher degree of risk at one of them should get more resources? is that fair? ms. cheatle: that is fair. rep. timmons: 12 events occur at the same time -- when two events occur at the same time, whichever event is at greater risk should receive greater resources? ms. cheatle: that is correct. rep. timmons: i'm going to go over the trump event per this was publicly announced. the venue was an outdoor fairground, open air no existing security. the crowd size was expected to be tens of thousands. it ended up being over 20,000. there were general and specific threats from foreign adversaries.

iran has said they want revenge, as well as when president trump was in office, he made a lot of people mad all over the world. president trump is the former and future president. i would say that is a fairly high risk event. what you agree -- would you agree? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. timmons: conversely, the first lady had an event at a casino in pittsburgh a few dozen miles away. a dinner for the italian sons and daughters of america. it was publicly announced july 10. what is interesting is the casino is extremely secure. they already have magnetometers prior to the event being announced. it was in a ballroom. the size of the crowd was 400. there were no specific threats. there may have been general threats. the asset is the first lady.

there seems there is a huge disparity relative to risk. would you agree? ms. cheatle: yes. rep. timmons: thank you. multiple whistleblowers and various media outlets have reported the allocated 12 additional to the first lady and 3-2 the trump rally. is that correct? ms. cheatle: there were no assets diverted. rep. timmons: i am not asking if anyone was diverted. did the first lady's event that was relatively secure especially compared to trump's rally get 12 assets? did the first lady's event get 12 assets and trump's get three from the pittsburgh field office? yes or no. if you do not know, don't answer. ms. cheatle: personnel were allocated to both events that were comparable to the risk at both of those events. rep. timmons: really?

you think the pittsburgh casino 400-person ballroom, probably a well guarded parking garage, was four times more dangerous than a 20,000-person rally in an open field with the former and future president? you think that is four times more dangerous, the casino? ms. cheatle: i did not say that. rep. timmons: they got four times the resources from the pittsburgh field office responsible for the final walk-through. we have continually highlighted the failures of the secret service at the trump rally. you have the former and future president getting shot. you've multiple injuries, one fatality. i would have to think that if we had nine more post standards, nine more individuals that have the trading and integration into the secret service defense of trump at that rally, i have a feeling crooks would have had someone say hello to him before he fired a bunch of shots. do you think that is possibly

true? ms. cheatle: there were significantly more assets and resources available at the former president's event than at the first lady's. rep. timmons: who made the decision to have 12 post standards at the casino where the first lady was having a dinner and only three from the pittsburgh field office to the 20,000-plus-person trump rally? who made that decision? ms. cheatle: there were additional secret service resources available at former president trump's event. rep. timmons: who made the decision to deploy 12 to the first lady's event and three to the trump event? ms. cheatle: the allocation of resources is decided based on the availability of personnel and their location and where they are. but there were sufficient resources given. rep. timmons: did you just say sufficient resources? president trump got shot! someone got killed! there were not sufficient resources clearly. it does not take 20 years of experience to know that.

whoever made that decision, probably not you, needs to be fired and you need to resign because you have lost the trust of the american people. i yield back. chair comer: the chair recognizes ms. talib from michigan. >> here. we hear the headline, a 20-year-old young man with access to an assault weapon commits a act of mass violence. we've heard this before. over and over again. the unfortunate thing is that my residents don't get a committee hearing. we've not had one committee hearing about the over 260 mass shootings we've had, killing hundreds of people, injuring hundreds, changing lives forever. don't get me wrong, the pool of blood, the screams, it was horrific. it made me think about the images i saw after mass

shootings at schools, grocery stores. i think of buffalo, new york, at a supermarket where a racist gunman killed 10 shoppers with an ar. in el paso, ak-47 style assault rifle killed 22. in florida, 17 students and teachers, murdered, again with an ar. in pittsburgh, at a place of faith, tree of life synagogue, 11 murdered. don't forget about newton, connecticut. 26 murdered including 20 elementary school children. this year in michigan, we've had two mass shootings. 21 shot in detroit. one of the most horrific shootings we've seen, two killed at a splash pad in rochester hills, michigan. eight shot.

again, an assault weapon used. but the difference here is the former president gets a hearing. our residents don't get a hearing, about mass shootings, gun violence in our country. mr. chair, i ask this wholeheartedly. they don't have secret service to protect them, they don't. they don't have these mass agencies protecting them at the schools or the supermarkets or theaters or block parties. we don't have that. but i can't believe we are just going to focus on that and not the fact that we are hearing yet again in the headlines, a 20-year-old young man having access to a weapon of war, many of my veteran say they have to be trained to use. but he could get it. it was not safely stored. grabbing that gun and innocent

lives are lost. director, i know you got asked about this, and i think it's important for us to hear this. how difficult is your job when there is such easy access to assault weapons in the streets? dir. cheatle: i think the job of the secret service agent and officer is incredibly difficult. the environment we deal with every day and the dynamics of the threat environment is incredibly difficult. these are brave men and women who put their lives on the line. and a day like we had on july 13, a day that no one in my agency ever wants to have as their responsibility. it is an incredible difficult job. rep. tla -- their lives are forever changed. the end incidents -- the

incidents are never isolated. the 20-year-old pennsylvania shooter looked up the 2021 oxford high school shooting in michigan. can you comment on what information the shooter was looking up regarding the tragedy of oxford tragedy where they took four of our youth? dir. cheatle: the fbi has those details. rep. tlaib: not even the type of weapon? dir. cheatle: i don't have those details. rep. kelly: did they share them? (202)-748-8001 i don't have -- dir. cheatle: i don't have the full content. we are examining all of his devices. rep. tlaib: i want to be serious about this. the impact on our families is more than just this political rally. we have to talk about this even if we are in disagreement. i've seen statistics that show

we could save lives if we ban these weapons of war from being able to buy them at the local store down the street. we can't continue to allow this to happen. my residents are not former president's. they don't get hearings or secret service protection. even among those expressing the failure in the system, they deserve better. they truly do. chair comer: the chair recognizes mr. burchett from tennessee. rep. burchett: the shooter was set up on the roof of a building. was that roof identified as a potential vulnerability before the rally? dir. cheatle: to my knowledge it was. rep. burchett: what floor were agents on if they were inside the building? dir. cheatle: local police officers were inside the building. rep. burchett: the roof looks like a tin roof. how did no one in that building hear someone thing around? dir. cheatle: i don't have the details of all of the interviews yet. rep. burchett: when will you

have those? dir. cheatle: i hope to have them as soon as you do. rep. burchett: why did secret service fail to block the line of sight from that roof? dir. cheatle: the secret service put together a plan where they were counting that roof in as part of the overwatch. that was the plan they had put in place that day. rep. burchett: if you were going to put a security person on the roof, why not use aerial surveillance to monitor the rally? dir. cheatle: there are a number of times that we use drone technology. i'm not speaking specifically to this event. there are times when drone technology is available and helpful at events and there are times when it is not appropriate. rep. burchett: do you use signal to communicate with any individual from the white house? on your phone? dir. cheatle: on occasion. i'm sure there are people who use signal. rep. burchett: do you use it? to speak with the white house? dir. cheatle: i do not.

rep. burchett: when was thomas crooks first identified as a person of interest? he was spotted with a rangefinder at 5:51. when did secret service notice him? dir. cheatle: i don't have those specific timelines but it was relatively short. rep. burchett: 5:52. why was president trump allowed on stage 10 minutes after the secret service spotted a suspicious individual? that seems to me, the biggest breakdown. that seems to me, the question. dir. cheatle: as i've stated, there were a of events where suspicious people may be identified. that doesn't necessarily mean -- rep. burchett: you have a guy who is going to be the next president of the united states, we've all been to these events. a car backfires and there is a

15 minute wait. that's not acceptable. did the secret service tell president trump they spotted a suspicious individual before he was shot? dir. cheatle: i am unclear as to what the communication was with the former president at that time. rep. burchett: i will take that as a no. did you deny president trump's request for more security? yes or no? when was the most recent request for additional security? dir. cheatle: the rally request for security. all of those requests were fulfilled. rep. burchett: or any of those personnel redirected to joe biden's rally? dir. cheatle: no. rep. burchett: who made the decision on either of those rallies? dir. cheatle: i'm unclear as to your question. rep. burchett: who directed those agents to be at ms. biden's rally? those specific agents?

dir. cheatle: there is a methodology in which agents are available for assignments and they are assigned based on geographic location or logistics or flights. rep. burchett: that mythology -- that methodology almost got president trump killed. was the detail darting trump a temporary detail? dir. cheatle: the detail assigned is assigned -- rep. burchett: why was there a different detail on the opening night of the convention than the one guarding him in pennsylvania? dir. cheatle: the president has a very large permanent protective detail assigned to him. they work shift work. it could be that the people you saw at the rally were not working the same shift the day that he was -- rep. burchett: someone a lot shorter than the president was not at the convention and the people cowering behind the massive agents on top of the president were not in the convention hall. at least i didn't see them.

you can't seem to answer a single question about an ongoing investigation and you don't know when the information will be released publicly. are you waiting for the administration to sign off? dir. cheatle: no, i'm waiting for the results of the investigation. rep. burchett: you found explosives in the shooter's possession, correct? dir. cheatle: the fbi found explosives. rep. burchett: do we know who directed this young man how to make those explosives? dir. cheatle: the fbi is still looking into that. rep. burchett: you said the buck stops with me and i agree. i don't think you should resigned, i think you should be fired. you are a d.e.i. horror story. i tell my daughter all the time about how she is going to succeed in life, by achieving. you have not achieved today. you have let the american people down. thank you mr. chairman. chair comer: the chair will now

recognize mr. crockett -- miss crockett. rep. clark: it let -- rep. crockett: was the incident on july 13 due to d.e.i. or rather systemic failures in communication and potentially safety protocols? dir. cheatle: the incident on the 13th has nothing to do with d.e.i.. it has to do with a failure or a gap, either in planning or communication. rep. crockett: thank you so much. i have a few articles that i will enter into the record once i wrap up, that acknowledge a number of women specifically for their valor and their service. whether it has been in various levels of law enforcement. but i want to stick here for a second because earlier you had a conversation in which there was a discussion about training.

i want to talk about training and i want to talk about the fact that there has been a little bit of dancing around as it relates to this being a suspicious person and this being a situation that was perceived to be a threat. it seems as if there is a different analysis that takes place. one of my questions has to do with if you have any bias training, that your officers undergo and the reason i asked that is because as a civil rights lawyer, i have learned so many times and having to deal with law enforcement that there usually is not a perception of a threat when it is a young white male, even if they are carrying a long gun. yet a lot of times at least in this country when it comes to law enforcement there is a perceived threat just by someone having a little more melanin in their skin. i'm curious to know because a lot of times one of the things we have consistently pushed for on my side of things, once we are looking at a tragedy in

which law enforcement made an error, is the bias training and whether or not our officers are getting it. i'm curious to know in some of the training you talk about in your budget, as bias training be -- has bias training been a part of it? dir. cheatle: yes. rep. crockett: thank you. i know that day in pennsylvania was a rough day and the reality is i understand it and you may or may not know the answer to this question. it wasn't open carry space, correct? dir. cheatle: correct. -- it was an open carry space, correct? dir. cheatle: correct. rep. crockett: i was serving in the statehouse after there was a mass shooting in el paso. we had an opportunity to do right by our citizens in texas, but we did not. instead they passed permit list carry. -- permit less carry. we want to come up with solutions, we don't want to keep

point in the finger and right now you have a bunch of fingers pointed at you but our job is to solve problems for the american people and to be perfectly honest the numbers are clear. i had almost every major law enforcement agency come forward and say that they were against permitless carry because they said their jobs would be more difficult. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle in the state of texas decided they would more those warnings and they passed the law instead. right after they pass that law we ended up with uvalde. we heard the stories of those officers that were scared to go in and save those babies because of the firearm with which that 18-year-old had in his hands. they were also given an opportunity to say raise the age and make it where at least you have to be 21 before you can possess this type of weapon. they chose not to. we have the facts. it shows, i will enter this into the record as well, debts from

firearms keep climbing in texas decades after lawmakers began, weakening gun regulations. chair comer: without objection. rep. crockett: thank you so much. we all care about this issue, because we know that there has been a spike in violence, political violence, political violence in this country. are you aware of the fact that the numbers are higher right now? dir. cheatle: yes. rep. crockett: in addition to that, and i'm going to point blame it ourselves because right now you got all the fingers pointed at you but the reality is we have a number of congressional members that are consistently engaging in violent rhetoric and it needs to be toned down. reality is people are listening and paying attention but another thing that is happening because we are not getting answers from you today is the conspiracy theories. they've already begun. have you heard any of them? dir. cheatle: yes. rep. crockett: the problem with these conspiracies is when people believe and say the president of the united states order to hit or they believe it

was an inside job or whatever because they don't have any facts in front of them, that potentially incites the next level of violence at the next event in retaliation for this. so we are only begging for your job as it relates to being the director as well as the men and women you are protecting as their director, that you keep them safe by making sure that the american people have the information they need so that they can feel as if secret service is on the side of the american people and i don't doubt that but right now, so long as these conspiracy theories continue to fester, it is going to make your job that much harder. thank you so much. chair comer: the chair recognizes ms. marjorie taylor greene from georgia. rep. greene: i would like to remind you that you are underwrote -- under oath. -- counter cyber element and detail.

who was the agent in charge? how long has she been the agent in charge and what is her secret service background? dir. cheatle: i'm not going to provide a name. rep. greene: why not? you are to answer our questions. dir. cheatle: i'm not going to provide names. rep. greene: you stated in your testimony, i am here to answer your questions. dir. cheatle: that is correct. rep. greene: answer the question. dir. cheatle: i'm not going to provide names of our personnel. rep. greene: why not? the american people are demanding these answers from you today. dir. cheatle: i will do the best to provide you accurate information based on the facts that i have at this time. rep. greene: you are not answering our questions. the advance element coordinates with other intel or law enforcement partners, identifies threats and weaknesses. you would like a copy of the advance report. have you brought it with you? dir. cheatle: we will report -- we will comply with the request for documentation. rep. greene: when will that be?

you should have brought it today. dir. cheatle: i am certain our personnel are working on obtaining all of that documentation. rep. greene: i don't believe you and neither did the people watching this hearing. you are not doing well. you've been sitting here for over three hours and i have you know the entire country is demanding you resign and demanding that you be fired if you do not resign. things are not going well and you need to answer the questions. was there a protective intelligence team and what technical resources were utilized for that event, specifically drone or helicopter assets? dir. cheatle: there were a number of technical assets that were deployed for that event and there was a protective intelligence team that was assigned to that event. rep. greene: why was crooks able to fly a drone over the entire area the day of the rally and the day of his assassination attempt? dir. cheatle: to my knowledge he did not fly the drone over the entire area. rep. greene: how did he fly a

drone over the area, period? dir. cheatle: i would have to check the timeline of when that took place. rep. greene: why didn't you bring the timeline with you to answer our questions? dir. cheatle: i don't have all the answers on the timeline based on the criminal investigation. rep. greene: were you not prepared today to answer our questions? dir. cheatle: i am prepared to answer the questions based on the information. rep. greene: do you have a timeline at all from any of the day? dir. cheatle: i have a timeline that does not have specifics. [laughter] rep. greene: that is shocking and on acceptable. that means you are a failure at your job. let's talk about things that are prohibited at trump rallies. i've been to a lot. backpacks and bags. bicycles. firearms. any type of weapon, or any other

item determined to be a potential safety hazard like a rangefinder would be. at 5:10, crooks is first observed by one of the snipers at the building. 5:10. president trump was shot at six: 11:00 p.m.. -- at 6:11 p.m. agents took a bicycle and two bags that belong to crooks. 5:32, snipers spot crooks looking at his phone and using a rangefinder. 5:55, butler esu confirms receipt of photos they have been relayed on. sniper one later communicates that crooks is seen moving northeast in direction of sheetz and that crooks has a backpack. two minutes before the shooting, while president trump has been

allowed to take the stage, people see crooks laying on his stomach and a sniper position on the roof and they are yelling he has a gun, and they are trying to alert law enforcement and secret service. why was crooks not shot by a sniper? why was he allowed to be there? dir. cheatle: as soon the individual was identified as a threat -- rep. greene: no no no. what do you consider to be a threat? a man with a gun laying in a sniper position, a man with a back pack, a bicycle, a man with a rangefinder. at what point is he determined a threat? dir. cheatle: an individual with a backpack is not a threat. an individual with a rangefinder is not a threat. rep. greene: what about a man laying on a building that has direct line of sight of president trump with a gun, that

people are screaming and pointing out? is that a threat? dir. cheatle: once that individual was identified, they were neutralized. rep. greene: no, they were neutralized -- crooks was neutralized after he shot president trump in the face. is he only a threat once he fires the weapon? dir. cheatle: as soon as the counter sniper identified that individual, they were able to neutralize them. rep. greene: ok, let's take it this way. people under your command did not consider him to be a threat but people in the crowd knew we had a gun and considered him a threat. that means that you are a complete failure as the director of the secret service. the people under your command don't perceive a man laying on a roof with direct line to the president with a gun -- they don't perceive that to be a threat, yet the people in the crowd do. how is that possible? chair comer: that is the last

question but please answer the question. dir. cheatle: i'm not certain at this time how the information from the people in the crowd was relayed to any law enforcement personnel. rep. greene: everyone knew. the people there knew that there was a danger. they knew there was a threat to president trump and it was allowed to happen. was there a standdown order? was there a conspiracy to kill president trump? dir. cheatle: absolutely not. rep. greene: how did this happen then? why are you sitting here and not turning in your resignation? chair comer: please answer the question. dir. cheatle: that is what we are investigating to determine. rep. greene: we are waiting for your letter of resignation. you really need to consider doing that before you leave today. chair comer: the chair now recognizes mr. print -- miss presley from massachusetts. rep. pressley: no one should fear for their life, absolutely no one. at a political rally, a

classroom, in a face -- in a faith house. we must do something about political violence in all of its forms and gun violence in all of its forms. director cheatle, you have noted that numerous investigations are ongoing related to the secret service response and that we can expect a report in the next 60 days. with the election nearly 100 days away, that is unacceptable and it makes people less safe. it also allows my colleagues across the aisle, republicans, additional time to spread dangerous misinformation which also puts people in harm's way. some republicans have exploited this moment to continue to attack progress towards racial justice and gender equity in america. disappointing but not surprising. i hesitate to repeat their racist and sexist tropes but in summary, republicans have wrongfully and shamefully stated that hiring women and people of

color hindered the response to the shooting. this is part and parcel republican strategy, to constantly attack necessary diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, to undermine the contributions that women, people of color, the disabled community and others make to this country each and every day, and it is disgraceful. in the wake of gun violence and tragic loss of life, republicans are ignoring solutions gun safety reform and instead trotting out sexist tropes. can't say i'm surprised. i ask you to miss consent to enter into the record reporting from cnn titled right-wing media figures blame women in secret service and d.e.i. for security failure in trump shooting. chair comer: without objection. rep. pressley: this article quotes members of congress and others that plainly accuse d.e.i. and the hiring of women as a liability for the secret

service. women have been an integral part of the service since 1971 and are held to the same standards as male counterparts. to use them as a scapegoat during a time of crisis is shameful and dangerously divisive. in fact, based on recent publicly available demographic data of the agency, the largest demographic groups among special agents are white male. but to right-wing extremists, the truth doesn't matter. the lies they tell to advance their anti-diversity gender -- agenda which is a key project throughout 2025 will only make the american public less safe and more divided. and every day, director cheatle, that you failed to give us answers, they are given more oxygen to make their baseless claims that women and people of color are responsible for tragic

events, and that is dangerous too. thank you and i yield my remaining time to ranking member raskin. ranking member raskin: thank you to the distinguished gentlelady from massachusetts and thank you for those insights. i wanted to make the point that you are making and several other members were making to bring it into sharp relief here. the very same day that donald trump narrowly escaped and assassination attempt -- escaped an assassination attempt and a firefighter was gunned down and killed and another person was injured, there was another mass shooting that day in birmingham, alabama. four people killed and 10 wounded in a nightclub shooting. you might think that is some kind of freakish coincidence. not at all. we have more than one mass

shooting a day in america. they are so commonplace now that they are barely reported on in the national news. local news in birmingham reported it. these things are a nightmare for the families of the victims who have been killed, for the families who have to take care of people who have been seriously injured and wounded. they are a major financial drain, publicly and privately. and yet we allow ar-15's to be purchased with abandon, promiscuously all across the country. people can just go out and get an assault weapon. the distinguished gentlelady from michigan is right. we have a hearing when it affects the president of the united states but on all the other days of the year we don't have a hearing about it. i think it is because in an

honest disagreement we have about the second amendment, some people think the second amendment means you've got the right to arm yourself with whatever weaponry you need to overthrow the government of the united states and we reject that as a false interpretation of the second amendment and a false interpretation of the constitution. we can ban assault weapons. we did it in 1994. it dramatically reduced mass shootings and when that ban was lifted, mass shootings went up through the roof again and we have shown it. just like we are demanding real answers and real action from the secret service, let us demand real action and real answers from ourselves, about the nightmare of mass gun violence which puts america into a category all its own when you compare us to the countries in the european union or canada or other similar countries. there is nothing like what we are going through, so we have to act to protect ourselves against

political violence and we have to act as a congress to protect ourselves against ar-15 violence in america. chair comer: the chair recognizes miss mclean from michigan. rep. mclean: thank you chairman. i want to thank the secret service agents who work tirelessly to prevent -- protect our residents and those who did not hesitate to jump in front of president trump. my heart goes out to the family of the people at the rally who are still recovering. on the other hand, the secret service has a leadership problem , and it falls on you. although i appreciate your hollow words that the buck stops here, i was actually hoping for some answers. director cheatle, you must answer to the american people if you want to stay in charge. it is really simple. you want to keep your job right? dir. cheatle: absolutely.

rep. mcclain: the best way to keep your job is to answer the questions, not play this shell game, not seeing the slim shady song it wasn't me. how long did you prepare for this hearing? dir. cheatle: i've been preparing for this hearing over the weekend and into last week. rep. mcclain: five days, six days? dir. cheatle: as soon as i was notified. rep. mcclain: how long was that? dir. cheatle: i began preparing. rep. mcclain:four days? three days? dir. cheatle: i'm not sure the date got a letter. rep. mcclain: what are you sure of? are you sure the color of your hair, the color of your shirt? tell the american people, what are you sure of? you don't even know what you started preparing for the hearing? you can't remember when he started preparing for this hearing? can you understand why those words seem hollow to the

american people who are supposed to entrust their faith in you? dir. cheatle: i ensure you -- i assure you, the moment i received notification -- rep. mcclain: but you can't remember? you have dementia going on? dir. cheatle: i have several operations and an organization to run. rep. mcclain: want to take accountability. let's start with trying to answer some questions. you keep referring to the fbi. when asked how many shell casings were on the roof, you referred to the fbi. when asked if there were explosives in the car, you referred to the fbi. when asked if crooks was acting alone, you referred to the fbi. my question is, who at the fbi should i speak with? wait for it. wait for it. dir. cheatle: the fbi's response will for the criminal -- rep. mcclain: is there a name? dir. cheatle: i'm not certain. rep. mcclain: i'm not certain.

here we go. i'm not certain, i don't know. let me ask a different question. have you been in communication with the fbi? dir. cheatle: yes, i have. rep. mcclain: with whom? dir. cheatle: i speak with the director and the deputy director. rep. mcclain: and what have they shared with you about this investigation? i'll give you an opportunity to answer again. did they share with you how many shell casings were on the roof? dir. cheatle: they have shared with me -- rep. mcclain: did they share with you how many shell casings were on the roof? dir. cheatle: yes. rep. mcclain: ok, how many were there? dir. cheatle: i would refer to the fbi. rep. mcclain: how many were there? dir. cheatle: and the information they need to share in their investigation. rep. mcclain: so, they've shared the information with you. you just don't want to share the information with us, correct? dir. cheatle: we have concurrent investigations that are going on. rep. mcclain: so, they have shared this information with you. you know the answer to the

question. you just refused to answer the question from the member of congress who has subpoenaed you to be here. is there a different answer to that question? dir. cheatle: i was always willing to come here and testify before this oversight hearing. rep. mcclain: beautiful, then let's do that. let's for once have your actions match your words. so, you have been in communication with the fbi. you know the answers, and you refuse to tell us the answers. so, i will ask you again. you know how many shell casings were on that roof. what is the answer to that question? dir. cheatle: i think it's pertinent -- rep. mcclain: what is the answer to the question? dir. cheatle: i think it's pertinent to talk to you about the information that the secret service has and that the secret service knows related to -- rep. mcclain: i am asking you an answer to the question. if you are supposed to be in charge, if the buck stops with you, how come you can't share the answers?

what are you covering up? what are you hiding, my friend? dir. cheatle: i'm not covering anything up. rep. mcclain: then why can't you answer a simple question? dir. cheatle: i would leave it to the criminal investigation to answer questions related to that. rep. mcclain: when you talk to the fbi and you ask them how many -- let me ask you, did you ask them how many explosives were on the roof? did they answer that question? or in the car, excuse me. did the answer that question for you? dir. cheatle: yes. rep. mcclain: yes, so you know the answer to that question my colleagues have asked you. but again, you refuse to give us the answers. you are playing this wasn't me. well, i submit to you, if you can't -- and it's not a can't, it's a won't. it's not a can't, it's not a i don't know, it's a i choose not to answer the question. well, let me tell you, ms. cheatle. if you're going to lead, you

need to lead. if you want to be in charge, then answer the question or step aside and have someone with the courage and the guts to answer to the american people the questions that they deserve answers to. and with that, i yield back. rep. boebert: i am going to continue down that vein. you have been here sitting today, director cheatle, definitively able to dismiss erroneous information and speculation, however, you are refusing to answer questions that we now know that you have the information for. you are saying that you are wanting to answer questions that the secret service has information to. ma'am, you are the secret service. you are the director. if you have said you are the best for the job. so, i'm going to ask you some questions now, now knowing that you do have answers from the fbi, whom you have been passing the buck to.

you spoke with president trump after the assassination attempt. i want to know, did you apologize to him directly for nearly having president trump killed? dir. cheatle: yes, i did. rep. boebert: i appreciate that. i appreciate that you recognize that this was your failure. now, since the assassination attempt, you are under oath, reminding you, have you communicated with anyone at the white house on an encrypted messaging app like signal? yes or no? dir. cheatle: no, i have not. rep. boebert: are you willing to surrender your personal phone for analysis? dir. cheatle: if i am required to do so. rep. boebert: ok. i will look into making that request because i would like to see your personal phone to see if you are communicated over encrypted messaging apps. have you ever turned down a

security request from donald trump's detail, his special agent in charge, sean koran? have you ever turned that down? dir. cheatle: no, i have not. rep. boebert: have there been -- has your team, has the secret service? maybe not you personally. dir. cheatle: i believe as i mentioned earlier, there are times when requests are made -- rep. boebert: and you have denied them. they have been denied. has the made requests for additional assets that have been denied? dir. cheatle: denial doesn't mean vulnerability. rep. boebert: have there been additional requests for enhanced security at mar-a-lago? dir. cheatle: we have made a number of enhancements. rep. boebert: you have confirmed there were bondsman -- bomb sniffing dogs provided. you failed to confirm if there were aerial security surveillance assets provided. so, yes or no? was that provided? at the rally, yes, ma'am. dir. cheatle: we had overwatch provided at the rally. rep. boebert: you have confirmed

that the assassin was identified a suspicious 57 minutes prior to the shooting. was the suspicious individual approached by an agent? was any contact ever made with him? dir. cheatle: not to my knowledge. rep. boebert: is that the standard protocol for someone who is identified as suspicious? dir. cheatle: the protocol would be to locate the individual. rep. boebert: and you said he was located two to five times approximately? dir. cheatle: no, i said the information was passed potentially -- rep. boebert: he was never located by an agent? dir. cheatle: to my knowledge, then individuals not located by an agent. rep. boebert: we have dozens of rally-goer's that have identified him and not one agent on the ground. there are many agents on the ground, secret service, no one was able to identify him and see him? dir. cheatle: what i am saying is the agents who were on the ground at the time, i have no

knowledge that they were able to interview him or locate him. rep. boebert: thank you. was there a local law enforcement officer who approached the roof and saw the shooter and saw that he was present on the roof? dir. cheatle: that is the information that has been shared with me. rep. boebert: have you spoke to that local law-enforcement officer? dir. cheatle: no, i have not. rep. boebert: are you going to? dir. cheatle: it is part of a criminal investigation. the fbi is interviewing those individuals. rep. boebert: were agents stationed on the water tower? dir. cheatle: no. rep. boebert: why? dir. cheatle: that would not be something that would be included in a security plan. rep. boebert: has the man who has reported to have been present wearing a gray suit who allegedly requested a photo of the dead body of the assassin on top of the roof been identified? dir. cheatle: i don't have that information. rep. boebert:rep. boebert: is that something you've heard of? dir. cheatle: no. rep. boebert: were atf agents

present at the rally? dir. cheatle: to attend or to work? rep. boebert: to work. dir. cheatle: not to my knowledge. rep. boebert: how long to the counter sniper have crooks in his sights before the shooter opened fire on president trump? dir. cheatle: i don't have that specific timeline. rep. boebert: will you be able to tell us if you communicated with other agents on what he was seeing through his sight? dir. cheatle: once i have that information, absolutely. rep. boebert: because we need to know why he waited for multiple rounds to be fired at president trump before the threat was neutralized. we need to know if he was given an order to hold fire. now, you have excused the roof of being unmanned because of the slope of the roof. do you continue to assert the slope of the roof as a credible reason for leaving this position undefended? dir. cheatle: first, i will go back and correct that there was

no order to hold fire. our agents and officers have the ability to neutralize a threat at the time we see it. rep. boebert: you don't know the competition that was taking place on how long he had him in his sites because you have not spoken to him, but you do know there was no order to hold fire? dir. cheatle: i can tell you the way our personnel are trained. they are trained on the use of force scale that when they see a threat, they are authorized to neutralize that threat. they don't have to ask for permission. rep. boebert: you excuse the roof being unmanned because of the slope. do you stand by that assertion? dir. cheatle: the roof was not covered with an individual on it because there was overwatch provided. rep. boebert: apparently not. no, there was no overwatch provided. it's very evident. president trump was shots. a man died. there was no oversight provided. i find this rather maddening, especially now knowing that you do have answers from the fbi, who you have been passing the

buck to this entire hearing, not answering a congressional hearing, members of congress while you are under oath and under a subpoena. i find it maddening that the director, that our country has come centimeters away from oblivion under your watch, you have answers, you are refusing to give those to us, directing us to the fbi, and this entire thing is a waste of time. you are responsible for the loss of all life and the shooting that took place on president trump. you do need to resign. this is bipartisan. you need to be fired. you do not need to hold this position. you are not the best for this job. i am over my time, but i cannot tolerate your watch any longer, and i'm going to continue to call daily for you to be removed from your position, ma'am. >> director cheatle, how long

have you been with the circuit service? 29 years, right? dir. cheatle: that is correct. >> and how long have you been director of the secret service? dir. cheatle: just under two years. >> during your tenure, i know we are here to talk about the assassination attempt on president trump, but how many other security lapses have occurred with protect eez under your watch? dir. cheatle: i don't have a specific number, but there have been some lapses. rep. fry: there have been other lapses. was one of them jake sullivan? dir. cheatle: yes, sir. rep. fry: what happened there? dir. cheatle: there was an individual who was able to access mr. sullivan's residence. rep. fry: his residence. they protect he, someone was able to break into his house. and what happened? did anyone get fired because of that? dir. cheatle: there were individuals who have been reassigned. rep. fry: what other steps -- excuse me, what other incidents have occurred other than jake

sullivan? was there an issue with a secret service agent and vice president harris? dir. cheatle: i would not call that a security incident. rep. fry: well, it seems to me, you have security lapses with president trump, you have security lapses with jake sullivan, you have issues with your personnel related to vice president kamala harris. there seems to be a repeated theme here. would you not agree with that? rep. fry: i think we are talking -- dir. cheatle: i think we are talking about separate categories of incidents. rep. fry: i would disagree with that. it seems to me there's a repeated theme. let me ask you something else, does the secret service routinely record communications between and amongst detail? dir. cheatle: radio communications? rep. fry: any communications. dir. cheatle: email communications are captured, as well as text messages.

and then depending on the detail, radio communications are recorded. rep. fry: does the secret service have recorded communications from the july 13 event? dir. cheatle: we do not. rep. fry: but you have text messages? dir. cheatle: we do have emails and text messages. rep. fry: great. does the head of the trump detail or someone else have command decision-making authority, or do they have to seek authorization from someone else? dir. cheatle: the head of the detail has the decision-making authority for things that are necessary for that detail. rep. fry: is that standard for protection details? dir. cheatle: yes, it is. rep. fry: all right. let me ask you something. during campaign events, is it common for the secret service to utilize other agencies? dir. cheatle: yes, it is. rep. fry: what other agencies would be providing assistance to the secret service? dir. cheatle: there are a number of other agencies that provide assistance to the secret service during campaigns. we have utilized personnel from

the department of homeland security, we utilized personnel from the department of defense, and we utilized local law enforcement partners. rep. fry: argue you on the same radios? do you provide the radios to all the assets taking part in protection of an event? dir. cheatle: we provide radios to the personnel from the department of homeland security that are assisting us. rep. fry: but not local law enforcement? dir. cheatle: local law enforcement is working on their own radios. rep. fry: are you on the same frequency? dir. cheatle: we ensure that we have counterparts in the security room, so the local law enforcement will place one of their personnel in the security room with our personnel so that we have interoperability communications. rep. fry: let me ask you about the timeline because i think this is really interesting we can't nail that down. i think there are lay people out there with more knowledge about the timeline than you seem to come before a subpoena in congress. was mr. crooks observed at the agr building prior to the shooting?

dir. cheatle: he was observed on the grounds outside of our perimeter prior to the shooting. rep. fry: at approximately what time was that? you don't have to give me the specific minute, but at approximately what time was that? dir. cheatle: i believe it was about 45 minutes or so prior to. rep. fry: did the sniper team take a photo of mr. crooks? dir. cheatle: the local team did, yes. rep. fry: so it was a local team and not a secret service sniper? dir. cheatle: that took the photo. rep. fry: ok. and did he relay that photo to central command? dir. cheatle: again, it is an active ongoing investigation, so i want to make sure that i am factual with the route that that photo took and who that was disseminated to and when. rep. fry: what time did mr. -- when did mr. crooks's status go from a suspicious person that was under suspicion to a threat? when did that happen? and maybe not even a specific

time, director cheatle. it may be a certain event that happened that transformed him from a person of suspicion to a threat. when did that happen? dir. cheatle: to the best of my knowledge, based on what i've been told thus far, it is approximately five minutes to where individuals relayed that there was an incident being -- or an issue, sorry, being worked at the 3:00 of the president. rep. fry: but it was before the shots were fired? dir. cheatle: that is correct. but again, it was not phrased as a threat. it was just that something was being worked. rep. fry: my question is, when did he become -- when did he transform from suspicion to threat? because they are treated very differently. people can be suspicious but they're not a threat until a certain point in time. so, when did that happen? dir. cheatle: i believe that it was seconds before the gunfire started. rep. fry: seconds. my gosh, we actually have a few

questions we got answered today. listen, i'm going to wrap up here, mr. chairman. but here's the frustration people have. the buck stops with you. you've said that yourself. but the problem in washington, d.c., it is the only town in america that you can be so bad at your job that you actually get a promotion or don't get fired. you have not been able to answer the number of agents, whether or not requests were denied on additional security, whether or not law enforcement was able to engage before the shooting with the assassin, how he got on the roof, how the rifle got on the roof. you can't tell us how many shots he fired, whether the casings were recovered. you can't tell us anything about his cell phone. you can't tell us whether the rally was supposed to be postponed given the intelligence you are receiving. you can't tell us whether the car had a bomb. you can't even tell us his motive. and the american people are incredibly distressful because it has taken nine days to even get a scintilla of evidence out of you. maybe if i was cnn or abc or nbc, i would have gotten much more thorough and accurate information.

but we have not received that in a subpoenaed hearing in front of this congress. that is why the american people are frustrated. and i echo the bipartisan calls on this committee and all across this country that you should resign, or maybe when the president wakes up from his nap, he can fire you. >> the chair recognizes ms. luna from florida. rep. lieu: not director cheatle, can you give me the names of the individuals in charge of your rally? dir. cheatle: i am not going to release names. rep. lieu: can you give me the titles? how many people with the final approval authority? dir. cheatle: there are a number of people who are engaged in approving the plan. rep. lieu: can you give me a number? dir. cheatle: i do not have rep. lieu: a firm number. i understand this is an open investigation. have you guys been able to subpoena the shooter's discord records, or has the fbi, to your knowledge? dir. cheatle: i believe the fbi is working on those.

rep. lieu: ok. is it factual to say you have not ruled out that the shooter was working with other people or persons? dir. cheatle: again, the fbi is conducting the criminal investigation. rep. lieu: can you in an effort to dispel conspiracy theories, can you confirm or deny that? dir. cheatle: at this time, we do not have that we had other people engaged. rep. lieu: so you believe he was acting alone? dir. cheatle: i do. rep. lieu: have you been aware of -- >> we will leave this recorded program here. you can continue watching on our website, c-span.org. live now to remarks from president trump. trumping tremendous financial numbers -- pres. trump: tremendous financial numbers. $25 billion. a lot of that is good management. more importantly, the tariffs that are pouring in. we have tariffs pouring in at levels we have never seen before.

and we have only just started. that is a small portion of this. that is mostly from aluminum and steel. a little bit of -- they will come in at levels that are extremely strong. a lot of money. we are dealing with other countries and in certain countries that would rather have a deal than a regular tariff. if they are willing to open up. these are countries that have been shot to us, but we have been open to them. in other words, they would not let us do business there, but they would do business in our country. not a fair deal. so, the european union is talking to us. they want to open up their country. i would say japan to a much lesser extent in terms of opening up their country. japan, as you know, we are very close with japan, but they sell us and billions and

billions of cars a year. we sell them no cars because they won't accept our cars, and they want except a bunch of our agriculture. but they are all changing their ways very, very rapidly. and a south korea wants to make a deal under the tariffs. right now, they are paying a substantial tariff. but they want to make it different. maybe i will change them and maybe i won't. but our country is making a lot of money, a lot of money for the first time in a long time, in decades. that is the way it should be. we have a country, i said it the other day to you people, we have a country that was dead, it was dead, it was a goner one year ago, and now we have the hottest country in the world. ok, questions? >> -- $4 million that would go to your legal benefits. where the slack go to the bottom

line? pres. trump: a lot of waste, fraud, and abuse. one of the reason i think you will see the numbers be very good for the country, but i think more than anything else, you have tariffs coming in, in the will be hundreds of billions of dollars. gaza, we are talking and hopefully we are going to get that straightened out over the next week. let's see what happens. reporter: as a father, as a husband --[indiscernible] pres. trump: he thinks it is good lyrically, i guess. he is saying that gavin newsom wants to keep men and women -- in women's sports. nobody understands it. i say it is a 3% issue. you know they say it is 80-20? i think it is 97-3. reporter: rosie o'donnell when

on chris cuomo's show recently. she blames you for the fact she is overweight, depressed, and drunk. what do you say to that? pres. trump: i don't know about rosie. i watch rosie. rosie is a mess. she's a mess. but she left our country, which is a good thing, not a bad thing. reporter: [indiscernible] pres. trump: i am going to have a meeting with the secretary general who is coming in tomorrow. but we basically are going to send them various pieces of very sophisticated military -- they are going to pay us 100% for them, and that is the way we want it. we have been trying to get it. i don't think biden never asked for it. we are in for about $350 billion. europe is in for $100 billion. that is a lot of money. but they should be in for more than us. as we send equipment, they are going to reimburse us for that equipment. doesn't that sound good?

that is the way it should have been a long time ago. reporter: [indiscernible] pres. trump: i have an agreed on the number yet, but they will have some because they do need protection. but the european union is paying for it. we are not paying anything for it. but we will send it. it will be business for us, and we will send them patriots, which they desperately need because putin really surprised a lot of people. he talks nice and then he bombs everybody. he is a little bit of a problem there. i don't like it. reporter: [indiscernible] pres. trump: i think so. i did, i spoke to him today. a very good guy. i've known him a long time. i've done his show many, many times. and he sounded terrific, actually. no, i think he's in good shape. reporter: on this one-year anniversary, what is going through your mind? pres. trump: will you repeat

that question? reporter: on this one-year anniversary, what was going through your mind this morning when you woke up? i know you praised god that you are alive, but a lot of people want to know how you're taking this day. pres. trump: god was protecting me. maybe because god wanted to see our country do better or do really well. make a good there -- make america great again. but god was protecting me. the more you think about it, the more you see it. but no, i don't like to think about it much. i have a job to do. so, i don't like to think about it much. it is a little bit of a dangerous profession, being president, but i don't really like to think about it too much. i think you're better off not thinking about it. reporter: you were able to accomplish 20 promises so far. pres. trump: we have more than delivered. thank you for saying that. but we made a lot of promises and we've actually given a lot more promises that we made. and you add on that a tremendous success with the strike we had

getting rid of nuclear weapons in iran, that was a big, big strike. when the pilots came to my office, they were there with some of the other people having to do with that strike. they said something very interesting. they said, you know, we have been practicing this for 22 years but no president had the guts to tell us to do it. but this has been on our minds for many, many years, and we did it. and i would say from zero to 10 with 10 being the best, that attack was a 15. reporter: what do you think about this new bill that is going to basically eliminate no capital gains tax on home sales to be able to free up the money for people who can't afford to pay the capital gains? pres. trump: we are looking at that. it could be a very big positive. i don't think for you because you make so much money. but i think it is going to be a great incentive for a lot of people that really need money. reporter: between that and

jerome powell stepping down, that could really boost home sales. pres. trump: i think if jerome powell stepped out, i think it would be a great thing. i don't know that he is going to. but he should. jerome powell has been very bad for our country. we should have the lowest interest rate on earth and we don't. he just refuses to do it. and yet, he is spending 2.5 billion dollars rebuilding the fed, the federal reserve building, and i don't know what he knows about buildings, but you talk about cost. he got this approved and he started to work through the biden administration, and he doesn't look like the kind of guy frankly that wants to spend $2.5 billion. and it is interesting because out of 71 economists, one person, me, and one other person i think from wharton got it right, and the others were all wrong in terms of the success of our country this quickly. we have no inflation. we have cash flowing in. it was me and somebody else.

i can tell you, i don't need 5000 people working for me behind-the-scenes like jerome powell to tell him what he should say once a month. because they got it wrong. the fed got it wrong. i called him too late. he is always too late. $360 billion, think of that. it is almost $1 trillion. approximately a trillion dollars left we should be with the signing of the signing of a piece of paper. i don't know if he is going to quit but he should quit because he has been very bad for the country. reporter: [inaudible] pres. trump: we are going to see what we will see tomorrow. europe has announced sanctions but i'm very disappointed with president putin. i thought he was somebody that meant what he said. and talked beautifully and then

he bombs people at night. thank you, everybody. [indiscernible chatter] >> representative boebert asked

about using the encrypted apps. i guess you haven't used signal. have you used encrypted apps to communicate from your personal device? >> i do on occasion use encrypted apps. to communicate. >> you use some form of encrypted app to communicate with people within the federal government? with low -- local law enforcement? >> many times it is with colleagues and associates. >> you are communicating with colleagues on a personal device? >> there are times the secret service, when we work internationally with some of our partners, they don't have the same texting capability. >> you can do that with your government issued an -- device? dir. cheatle: we have been

recently able to install those on government devices. >> let's talk about some of the things that we can get access to. i'm shocked that you are using your personal device and encrypted communication tools. that might be the most shocking thing i have heard today. we have requested multiple documents and this is not under the purview of the fbi. we requested a complete list of all law enforcement personnel, including local law or spent with the roles of protecting the president and we were busted that for us to receive god by july 18. did you provide that? >> i believe our agency is in the process of collecting the documents. ask you have not provided it take -- how long does it take to

compile all the people there? >> we requested audio and video recordings that your agency, not the fbi by your agency has in possession related to the event. did we receive those? have you provided those? dir. cheatle: we are in the process of requesting documentation that have been requested. >> any memorandums or internal communications related to the event? we requested that you provide that. have you provided any of that? dir. cheatle: we are in the process of collecting the information that is been requested. ripple langworthy -- mr. langworthy: ok. how long does it take to determine who was on site, was employed to be there to protect the former president? how many days does it take to provide that information? dir. cheatle: we want to make

sure we have a comprehensive accounting of all of the documents that were engaged on that day. we will make them available as soon as possible. >> i think transparency is the key here. it's a shocking to me where -- that we are communicating in an encrypted apps to colleagues. i am almost certain that violates some favorable. there some federal laws. dir. cheatle: i would like to clarify, you didn't ask whether my communications were government work-related or whether they were personally related or probably related. i communicate on my work device. rep. langworthy: are you using an encrypted device on your work device? dir. cheatle: i am not. rep. langworthy: thank you mr. chairman. >> the chair recognizes mr. waltz from florida. rep. waltz: thank you, mr. chairman. madam director. i would like to direct your attention to this video.

>> i appreciate the clarity on this. >> this has popped up. republican congress and -- congressman mike wells said this on saturday -- mike waltz said on social media on saturday and go and read this for you because he does talk about you, secretary. i have very reliable sources telling me that had been repeated requests for stronger secret service protection for president trump denied by secretary mayorkas. your department has already pushed back on that calling that absolutely false but he is putting this on you. can you respond to that, please? >> that is a baseless baseless and irresponsible statement and it's one that is unequivocally false. >> director cheatle, did you speak with your boss, secretary mayorkas? you fall under dhs? did you speak with him on the 14th, the day after? dir. cheatle: yes i did. >>'s you spoke with him before he made that statement.

dir. cheatle: i spoke with him immediately following the incident. >> did you inform him that all requests for additional resources for president trump had been fulfilled? or that it was false to say they have been denied? dir. cheatle: i informed him that the requests for the rally that day have been fulfilled. >> ok. you continue to answer that very carefully. because i made a broader statement, the agency came to me -- the agents that came to me made a broader statement that is permanent protective detail for years now have been asking for more. is that correct? dir. cheatle: i don't have specific incidents of those requests. >> is it correct they been asking for more? dir. cheatle: i have heard the same reports that you have. without having them in front of me -- >> they were made in writing. agents tell me they make them in writing. this is in the verbal agency. things are made in writing.

dir. cheatle: i understand what you're saying. i don't have those requesting -- requests in front of me -- >> were you aware they were made? dir. cheatle: i said there were times when requests are made and dependent on the availability of assets, if there is a way the vulnerability can be mitigated in a different way, -- >> there were times when they were denied? dir. cheatle: that is why the secret service has a multifaceted and multilayered security land so we can pivot -- >> in the immediate 48 hours of an assassination attempt on the former president, who could be the next leader of the free world, he almost had his head blown off in your boss says it is irresponsible to say things that are false and denied. did he make that up on his own or did you tell him that? dir. cheatle: we were speaking about requests made at the

rally. >> can we show the next slide please? then we have your spokesman, did you sign off on this statement? that there is an assertion that a member of the former president's team requested security resources and those were rebuffed? this is absolutely false. in fact, we added protective resources and technology and capabilities as part of the increase campaign travel temple. -- tempo. but next slide, please. next slide. we have a washington post article that then says we now have senior secret service officials saying that were in terms, at times when it was denied. so which is it? dir. cheatle: again there been a number of conversations going on here. rep. waltz: did you sign off on that spokesman statement. dir. cheatle: i believe it was related -- rep. waltz: did you sign off on it? dir. cheatle: for the request --

rep. waltz: i sign off on my statements. you did? categorically false that any requests were made? you signed off? thank you for that clarity. how many press conferences have you held since the assassination attempt? dir. cheatle: we have put out -- rep. waltz: how many press conferences have you held where you took questions from the public and the media? how many? dir. cheatle: none. rep. waltz: when he has secretary new york us held? zero. has the fbi held? zero. how many has the department of justice held? i know you know the answer. dir. cheatle: i believe that was a press conference in butler after the incident occurred. dir. cheatle: -- rep. waltz: by local law enforcement. not by you and not by the department of homeland security.

so this is how, disinformation flies. in the darkness, in the absence of information. now we have nine days later before a congressional committee present almost a million people and you still don't have answers. are you aware the national news anchors are saying this was a hoax? on national television they're saying no, the president wasn't shot. it was flying glass. are you aware of that? dir. cheatle: have not heard that. rep. waltz: are you aware i mean there are rumors rampant online that there were multiple shooters? dir. cheatle: yes. rep. waltz: are you aware because the shooter had overseas encrypted platforms in belgium and new zealand and germany, people are speculating there could have been foreign involvement, logically? dir. cheatle: yes. rep. waltz: have you done anything to disabuse these notions? no. you haven't.

madam director, i would fire you just how you have handled it since. you should have been the first of the microphone to say america, world, i want to assure you we are going to get to the bottom of this. i want to assure full transparency, our agency had major gaps and i want to personally take responsibility and accountability. you should have been the first. standing alongside secretary mayorkas. and i would even go so far as to say have daily press conferences, updating everyone on what we know. but you haven't had any of that. what are you hiding behind? dir. cheatle: i'm not hiding -- rep. waltz: you are making the situation worse. you have heard that on a bipartisan basis. you are making the situation far worse in the absence of information. let's move on. this is truly astounding. i want to be clear because you keep dodging the issue. has president trump's permanent protective detail requested additional assets over the last

few years? he is clearly not your average former president. he's not jimmy carter in an old folks home. not president bush painting out in his barn. he has multiple residences, a lot of rallies. he's very publicly engaged and the foreign threat in addition to domestic threats. have they requested additional resources? >> that's the last question but please feel free to answer, director. dir. cheatle: we have continued as i stated earlier to increase over the past year the assets that are at the former president residence and supplied his detail. rep. waltz: if i could ask for one more indulgence. it is clear you have not been to butler, pennsylvania, leaders lead and should be on the ground. you have not been there. instead you went to the rnc, but you were not originally going to go there. what were you originally scheduled to go before the rnc, a national security special event? dir. cheatle: i was always

scheduled to go to -- rep. waltz: i would like to enter to the record that the director was scheduled to go to aspen, hobnobbing with i don't know who, what liberal elites go to aspen. that is where you were scheduled to go to speak at a forum. dir. cheatle: i was scheduled to go to the rnc. i was going to leave the rnc for 24 hours and return back to the rnc. rep. waltz: i hope as your predecessor julie pearson, with a security incident on the white house under the obama administration, and reagan's secret service detail lead, i would hope you would have the dignity for the sake of the agents and the service to resign. chair comer: the time of the gentleman has expired. i would at like to enter things into the record. first of all, the remaining articles that mr. biggs was one to entering to the record. without objection, so ordered. next have written statement from representative mike kelly of pennsylvania. his district includes butler,

and he has a written statement that would like to enter to the record. without objection, so ordered. a bipartisan 114th congressional report titled united state secret service and agency in crisis. this was prepared by a former oversight committee chairman jason chaffetz and former ranking member elijah cummings. and lastly, the issue subpoenaed compelling director cheatle appearance at today's hearing. without objections so ordered. that concludes our question segment. i want to thank the director for your testimony today. i now yield to the ranking member for closing remarks. rep. raskin: thank you, mr. chairman and director cheatle i also want to thank you for your patience over the course of what must have been a very long and trying hearing for you. it has been an unusually encouraging hearing and an unusually depressing hearing.

what's encouraging, mr. chairman, is that we came together to issue a strong statement deploring and categorically denouncing political violence in america. and i also didn't see any daylight between the members of the two parties today at the hearing in terms of our bafflement and outrage about the shocking operational failures that led to disaster and near catastrophe on july 13, 2024. what is depressing is the extraordinary communications gap between the director of the secret service and congress, and i don't want to add to the directors terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day, but i will be joining the chairman in calling for the resignation of the director just because i think that this relationship is

irretrievable at this point, and i think that the director has lost the confidence of congress at a very urgent and tender moment in the history of the country. and we need to quickly move beyond this. but i will say, mr. chairman, is that i took this hearing to be about two major policy failures. one policy failure is one of the . the majority of the attention, which was the failure of the secret service to effectively respond to a gunman on a roof within 150 yards of a presidential visit and speech. but the other failure is on the part of congress. because the mass shooting that took place in butler, pennsylvania, is replicated all over the country every day. and in fact, as i said, mr. chairman, it happened that evening in alabama, in

birmingham, where there was a mass shooting where more people even were killed and wounded and -- then were killed and wounded in butler, pennsylvania. so it's true the president, former president and handful of people who get the secret service protection are the only people in america who we thought were safe from ar-15 attack. it's clear that they are not safe either. we've got to get to the bottom of that. but we also have to get to the bottom of the larger problem, which is that the whole country is living like this in fear and in terror of assault weapon attacks in movie theaters, churches, synagogues, mosques, supermarkets, walmarts, you know, anyplace where an audience or a public gathers. the worst was in las vegas where a gunman got up on a roof and then just mowed down 60 people below him and wounded hundreds and hundreds of other people. so we've got to deal with that problem.

yes, we have to move as swiftly as we can come up to deal with the problems of the secret service. but the broader problem is still there. and i just wish to the heavens that our colleagues could get together on the question of presidential security against an ar-15 attack could get together on the question of public security against an ar-15 attack. because all of us are vulnerable. all of our families are in danger by this, and the rest of the world doesn't live this way. and we have to look to see how uniquely strange it is that we allow 20-year-olds to access ar-15s, weapons of mass distraction, and show up in public places to endanger other people. and i hope, mr. chairman, we can work together on that with the same spirit of bipartisan commitment to the public safety that was exemplified today. i yield back. rep. kilmer: ranking member

yields back. i will deliver my closing remarks. director cheatle, i have subpoenaed you to appear today to get answers for the american people about the failures that led to the assassination attempt of president donald j. trump. unfortunately, you refuse to answer today. this committee is not known for its bipartisan, its model of bipartisanship. i think today we came together unanimously in our disappointment for your lack of answers. you stated that the fbi will investigate and get a report and , you estimate 60 days. we have been waiting for months and months for lots of different bits of information from the fbi. we have no confidence in the fbi, the majority of this committee has no confidence in the fbi. i sincerely hope that the

hearing today would give not just congress confidence in the secret service, but the american people would have confidence in the secret service. we don't have confidence, not just in congress, i don't believe the american people tonight when you go to bed are going to have confidence that the secret service is the best it can be at protecting president biden, at protecting the first lady, at protecting president trump, at protecting their families. that's what the primary role for the secret service should be. and some people said and speculated well, there needs to be more money and more employees. as i stated early on, $3.1 billion, next year $3.2 billion budget, over 8000 employees. if the secret service is spread too thin and doing things like inspecting counterfeit which is what the secret service was created to do, was to respect

-- inspect counterfeit money and things like that, with the treasury. if it is spread too thin and we need to come together and i think we can do that in a bipartisan way, to narrow the focus of the secret service to protect the leaders of our country, to protect our elections by protecting our candidates. i don't believe we have any confidence that you can do that as the leader of the fbi. i sincerely hope that we this -- we would adjourn this committee hearing and have confidence not just in the secret service but in, in you as director of the secret service. but we do not. taking responsibility requires a lot of things. it means providing transparency. it means answering simple questions. it means providing a specific timeline of july 13 so this committee and american people, it has been nine days. there were people that were

demanding that we have a hearing the next day or two days following the shooting and i said no, we need to give the secret service ample time to be able to answer those questions. nine days, nine days and i don't think we answered very many questions. i don't think there was, i've never said this before and i preside over a lot of hearings. i don't think there was one question asked by anyone, the the average american has already -- hasn't already asked at a diner or a church or at a ballgame. the american people have questions. they deserve answers. congress deserves answers. you were subpoenaed today to provide answers and you did not. so as ranking member raskin stated, he and i will be sending a letter requesting that you submit your resignation as a step towards accountability in what happened. and one of the biggest

frustrations that many of us avenue especially on this side of the aisle, is that there is never accountability in this administration. when you look at the debacles, prior to july 13, it would be hard to beat the withdrawal in afghanistan, the debacle there. no one was held accountable. to this day no one has been held accountable for that. but here we have clearly video showing people notifying the police and the police are blaming the secret service. the secret service are blaming the police. homeland security is blaming everybody. but at the end of the day, after this hearing and after our request for information we don't have any answers for the american people and we don't have that confidence that you can lead the secret service to restore the confidence. and again i commend the ranking member for joining with me, in the letter asking for

your resignation. we certainly hope that you will take that to heart. with that and without objection all members have five legislative days with into which to submit materials of additional written questions for the witness which will be forwarded to the witness. if there's no further business, without objection the committee stands adjourned. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2025] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [indiscernible chatter] >> that is what we call a smack down. it is not good. you can't be happy about that. it is sad. even this guy standing back here, right? it was so -- he was filming for c-span, a quality organization. >> c-span's washington journal,

our live forum inviting you to discuss the latest issues in government. politics. and public policy. from washington and across the country. monday morning, the former federal reserve bank of kansas city member discusses the economic outlook and president trump's calls for jerome powell to resign. a reporter previews the week ahead at the white house and news of the day. cliff young with it so stalks through his organization's polling on president trump's record so far. washington journal. during the conversation live at 7:00 eastern monday morning on c-span, c-span now, our mobile app, or online at c-span.org. >> this week on the c-span networks. the house and senate are in session. the house will consider legislation regulating the currency as well as 2026 defense

spending. the senate plans to vote on the white house rescissions package request to cut to cut $9.4 billion in foreign aid and public broadcasting fund approved by congress. former congressman and one trump national security advisor mike waltz appears before the senate foreign relations committee as the president's nominee to be u.s. representative at the united nations. it is part of the confirmation hearing before the committee. wednesday, transportation secretary and acting nasa administrator sean duffy testifies before the house transportation committee regarding his department's 2020 six budget. coverage of the 17th annual congressional women's softball team in washington, d.c., between a bipartisan congressional team against a team from the washington, d.c. press corps. watch on the c-span networks or c-span now, our free mobile video app. head over to c-span.org for set -- scheduling information or to

watch live or on-demand any time. c-span, democracy unfiltered. >> as mike said, i happened to listen, he was on c-span1. that is a big upgrade. right? >> i have read about it. in the history books. i have seen the c-span footage. >> if it is a good idea, present it in public view on c-span. >> every time i tuned in on tictac or c-span are you, there were tens if not hundreds. >> of thousands of people watching. >> i went home after the speech and turned on c-span. >> i was on c-span this week. >> to the american people, now is the time to tune in to c-span. >> they had something come at $2.50 per gallon, i saw it on television a little while ago in bit my watching my great friends

on c-span. >> c-span is televising this live so we are just speaking to los angeles, we are speaking to the country. >> c-span. democracy unfiltered. we are funded by these television companies and more including cox. >> when connection is needed most. cox is there, bringing affordable internet to families in need. new to boys and girls club's and support to veterans. service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front-row seat to democracy. >> next on c-span's q&a, dr. robert malone, talks about his book, in which he argus the

u.s. government uses psychological warfare against americans to control them. then british prime minister takes questions on health services, the economy, taxes, immigration reform for members of the house of commons at the weekly prime minister's question time. and later, president dawn dawn, hosts african leaders at the white house, following his administration's division to have usa id in the state department and go from traditional aid to a business-driven approach.